brrywill

As a long working pro during the "film era" of photography, I had the great pleasure of taking photos with magnificent precision made machines from the likes of Hasselblad, Leica, and Nikon. When the digital wave hit I considered quitting photography rather than be forced to take photos with a plastic computer with a lens on the front. I know any change is hard, but I can't help feeling the camera companies sold their soul when they allowed the young computer geeks to completely design the new cameras. There was no transition from manual controls, it was a jump right off the cliff into digital oblivion. Many of these designers were too young to have even experienced the joy of a simple three point control of a photograph. The idea that there was no need to take your eye off the subject to read a menu and lose the shot.

Then along came Fuji to save the day with their great camera controls. When I shoot with the GFX and X cameras they allow me, once again, to forget about the equipment and concentrate on the subject.

Perhaps my greatest disappointment was the way Nikon introduced their greatest achievement to date, the Df. The price was too close to the D810, a simple $300 reduction would have probably doubled the sales. Then they called it retro.....what the h___ is retro!? Com'on Nikon, it's not about the looks, although it helps, people bought that camera because of the controls. I know I did. Which brings me to my point.... Am I the only one who would like to see one of the Nikon Mirrorless cameras come with Df/Fuji style surface controls? I am really surprised no one has mentioned this.

BebuLamar

Would you buy the Df if the price is $300 lower? What's wrong with the controls of the Df? Why the Df is not retro? At one point in the past Nikon was selling new D810 for less than the Df.

rcarol

As I remember the latter Nikons, their styling and functionality parroted the current digital Nikons to a great extent. I'm thinking about the N2020, the N6006, the N8008 and the N90 and N90s.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Your point is well taken !

..

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

As a design engineer and statistician I tend to see the world as one normal bell shaped curve after another. That means most stuff fits in the middle +/- 2 Sigma (about 95%), but there is stuff that hangs out of the low probability areas of the left side and right side of the curve. In others words, no company / R&D organization / engineering group / manufacturer will ever be able to satisfy everyone, just the vast majority of their customers especially with a major technology change like film to digital. At least, one can still buy film cameras if they want to.

brrywill

You are absolutely right, you can't please everyone. It is a truism that applies across the board to most things in life. Do I think there could have been a smoother transition from film to digital, certainly. But I think, in the case of the Df, Nikon never really gave it a chance. It was a camera that could have changed the entire direction of their designs going forward. But they started by over pricing it, not by a lot, but enough to preclude most, or at least many impulse buyers. Then they never followed up with a higher res sensor, or fixing the few complaints there were about the camera. I look at it as a missed opportunity on the part of Nikon.

I also think it is possible Nikon is hitching it's wagon to the wrong star with the Z line. Sure Sony is #1 right now, but largely because they are the only full frame ML game in town. I say to Nikon, do what you do well, and success will follow. Fuji was successful and they don't even have a FF ML camera, but they did their own thing.

To paraphrase Robert Frost, sometimes taking the road less traveled can make all of the difference.

brrywill

I bought the Df at it's higher price, so yes, I would have gladly paid $300 less. As for the controls, no complaints here, I think they are the best of any digital Nikon to date.

Why is the Df not retro? Well, I suppose it is, if you want to call visible controls retro. But I don't think that should be it's main selling point, it's selling point should be it's superior functionality and ease of use.

The fact that the D810 was selling for less than the Df only amplifies my argument that Nikon priced the Df out of contention.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I am afraid the Df has wound up as an experiment that Nikon has rejected .......8-(

..

brrywill

It does look that way, unfortunately.

delkeener Loc: SW Rhode Island, USA

One good thing about the Pany LX100 is the liberal use of direct controls.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

Photographers sure are opinionated. To the best of my knowledge, even though the Df is now nearly 5 years on, sales have been so good that Nikon has not yet dropped the selling price of the camera. We may need to check with MTShooter on this, he owns a camera store and is more knowledgeable than I. But I'm thinking that the Df has been a big success.
Yes, because I love my Df, I would have liked to see Nikon intro a Mirrorless in the "Retro styling" (BTW, it is called "retro" because it looks so much like my first ever camera from 1980, the Nikon FM. I even got the "silver" version). But rcarol is correct. Most current Nikons are not far in styling from a litany of AF, auto-film advancing cameras from Nikon's past.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

That would only result in twice the number of people on the waiting list. They have already sold out their first production run. At this point, they can sell them as fast as they can make them. I wouldn't be surprised to see a $300 price increase.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I too, was a working pro back in the old film days. I had a Hasselblad, 3 Roleiflexes, and a Nikon F2 Photomic. My first Nikon Digital was the Nikon D70s, and while it was limited in resolution, it was an amazing camera and used heavily. My Nikon F2 was amazing and I used it continously until I moved from film to digital. I would have put it up against any of my other cameras (with the exception of the Hasselblad) and got wonderful slides, prints and I printed alot of Cibi for prints from slides. I had a full B&W/Color darkroom and never had issues with my Nikon F2 vs anything but the Hasselblad which was a larger format camera. As for controls, the D70s and Nikon F2 were similar enough that I was smart enough to tell which I had in my hand at a given time and adapt. I can't think of a single time that I thought.. "oh crud, this is the D70s you do it different". Now, I didn't like the difference (at the time) in resolution between film and the D70 but it was a 6 mp "high end" digital camera at the time and there really weren't alot of options. Oh and at that time, because of the brittleness of sensors and expense, there were no FX Nikon Digitals so it was either the DX or film. And that was a time that (for me) marked the decline of the darkroom. And, yes I still have the Rollei, an old Kodak 35, an Agfa, and a couple of others. But I don't complain about the controls and the Nikon Z's are just a new addition to the lineup. Will they replace the DX, the FX, or (and this is my opinion) will it replace the Nikon 1? It's hard to say. Personally, I still haven't moved to the SWM lenses... mine are all older lenses that use the focus motor in my cameras.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

My first Nikon was a F-301, sold as a N2000 in the USA. Similar to the N2020 (F-401) but without AF. I was a photographer and did not need AF especially since I bought MF glass. The auto exposure was a big leap for me and a huge upgrade from the match-needle Pentax body I had been using. I went digital with the Olympus C2500L SLR that had a fixed mount zoom lens and a 2.5mp sensor, and back to Nikon with a D70s. I am not a big fan of menu driven controls and traded up to a D300 for the direct access controls (and 12mp).

SonyBug

I don't agree with your hypothesis of who designed the cameras and why at all. I more favor, "if you build it, they will come". Many more people own cameras today than in the film days. I for one gave up film for the expense of thousands of photos that nobody would ever see but me, and were very expensive. Now I have tens of thousands of photos, some (actually many) on my walls with barely any cost other than equipment.