I started transitioning from film years ago with a variety of point and shoot and bridge cameras, but I have never gotten completely away from my love of film. My first Nikon dslr is a D7200 with an 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. I love that camera and lens and still find excuses to use that kit today even though I have a D800, D850 and D500. Along the way, I picked up a lot of expensive glass, which is worth a lot more than the value of the bodies including a Nikon 600mm f/4 used for wildlife / birding. In order to go mirrorless, I wanted a camera better than my D850 and could use my glass. I was patient waiting out the mirrorless wars and was finally rewarded with the Z9. What separates it from my dslrs is IBIS, subject tracking and frame rate all of which increase my keeper rate, but there is no real difference in IQ. I am relieved I did not have to sell my Nikon gear and replace it with another system at great expense. I am very happy that I do not have to learn a new, or multiple, menu systems and I just plain like the feel of my Nikons in my hands and I like their reputation for building rugged products that perform well even in difficult environments.

I read so many posts here and on other photography forums from those who believed they had to have this new technology to become better photographers or even to avoid embarrassment to just stay in photography. BS! Mirrorless does not make you a better photographer and there are plenty of enthusiasts out there that will continue to capture stellar images with their dslrs. Many on these forums have got it backwards as they start with gear then try to take great images with it. A better way is to start with how to create great images, then figure out what gear you need to accomplish that.

Photography is not something new to me - so I am not a novice at image composition seeking to be "better,", or lacking familiarity with different types of equipment to compose images. When Nikon put that “f” like design into a digital camera - Nikon photographers (like me) who have been around for a while took notice. The first camera I shot with was a Nikon F. The F series has an undisputed legacy of classic design and toughness - it is a blend of simple and rugged. The Nikon Df took me back to that photography equipment simplicity and ruggedness - with a classic blend of old style film camera design bundled with new digital functionality. The look and feel of the Df reminds me of what I shot with when first introduced to 35mm film SLR photography. What I instantly liked about the Nikon Df was that it did not have the heft and and bulk of my Nikon D700. In comparison, the Df is quiet, light and fast. Also liked that when actuating the shutter it did not have the ‘machine gun’ loudness of my D700. In terms of film, I don't have my own darkroom anymore - although I believe I can remember how to get a roll of Ilford film out of a 35mm canister, develop it and burn prints. The Nikon Df full frame dSLR and Nikon Z fc are keepers mainly due to my Nikon nostalgia. But both cameras can produce good images - neither is in my hands as much as my current go-to devices though - you have actually motivated me to charge up the Df battery and shoot some frames - and wax nostalgic. I have attached a few images taken with my Nikon Df.

I started transitioning from film years ago with a variety of point and shoot and bridge cameras, but I have never gotten completely away from my love of film. My first Nikon dslr is a D7200 with an 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. I love that camera and lens and still find excuses to use that kit today even though I have a D800, D850 and D500. Along the way, I picked up a lot of expensive glass, which is worth a lot more than the value of the bodies including a Nikon 600mm f/4 used for wildlife / birding. In order to go mirrorless, I wanted a camera better than my D850 and could use my glass. I was patient waiting out the mirrorless wars and was finally rewarded with the Z9. What separates it from my dslrs is IBIS, subject tracking and frame rate all of which increase my keeper rate, but there is no real difference in IQ. I am relieved I did not have to sell my Nikon gear and replace it with another system at great expense. I am very happy that I do not have to learn a new, or multiple, menu systems and I just plain like the feel of my Nikons in my hands and I like their reputation for building rugged products that perform well even in difficult environments.

I read so many posts here and on other photography forums from those who believed they had to have this new technology to become better photographers or even to avoid embarrassment to just stay in photography. BS! Mirrorless does not make you a better photographer and there are plenty of enthusiasts out there that will continue to capture stellar images with their dslrs. Many on these forums have got it backwards as they start with gear then try to take great images with it. A better way is to start with how to create great images, then figure out what gear you need to accomplish that.

I went digital over 20 years ago and I never heard anyone call a DSLR, a digital SLR, just DSLR. You do realize you lose a bit of integrity when you say crap like DSLRinosaur. You are basically insulting the people who either can't afford the latest and greatest, are happy with what they have, or are waiting for the technology to mature and stabilize, which it is now doing.
I have nothing against MILC'S, I like the one I have and I'm saving up to buy a new one, when Canon releases one that I'm ready to spend the money on. For now, my 5D mk IV and my D850 and my 90D do what I need them to do, and they do it quite well, mirror and all.