I wonder what the mark-up on the Df is compared to the D610 and the D800? They'll probably make more selling one Df than two D800s.
deltaskyking: Anybody else think it's a mistake that Nikon didn't include video on this camera? The camera model "Df" means "Digital fusion" meaning combining the old style of Nikon's camera body with the new capability of digital cameras. Personally, I like the look. However, after being bitten by the oil spotting the sensor problem on my Nikon D600 and Nikon's slow reluctance to even address that issue, I'm going to spend my money elsewhere - maybe a new Sony A-7.
...or people that understand marketing. That said, I am fairly confident I know something about DSLRs and marketing and I am not pleased with the price, nor some of the features both present and absent from the Df. If Nikon can sell the D800 for less than this Df throughout much of Europe that is fair indication it is over priced.
Saffron_Blaze: I would love to have a reasonably priced prosumer camera with the D4 sensor in it. However, I was thinking more like D700 not D610. The D700 was as close to being professional grade as the D610 is to being consumer grade.
"DXO sensor scoring is nearly useless"
DPR likely disagrees with you.
The only real mistake Nikon made with this camera is the price. It bought them much negativity.
You are one of the few that think the D800 was a replacement for the D700.
I would love to have a reasonably priced prosumer camera with the D4 sensor in it. However, I was thinking more like D700 not D610. The D700 was as close to being professional grade as the D610 is to being consumer grade.
NR is reporting that sales of the Df are very underwhelming and is attributing this to price.
Paying $3000 for a camera because it looks good seems rather silly.
$2000 gets me a D610.$3000 gets me a D800 or a Df.The Df is a D610 with a D4 sensor.Is the D4 sensor worth the extra $1000 (minus video, and flash)?Is the D4 sensor really better than the D800's?
Craig from Nevada: Retro is soooo 2012
There are 2000 comments because many people are justifiably disappointed at the price and a few apologists are desperately trying to justify selling a retro D600 for $3000.
This "pure photography" marketing hype is overdone. The is a DIGITAL SLR with a pretty dress on, and your wife will not appreciate how much money you have spent on getting access to it.
marike6: I get some UK users complaining about price, but people here in the US and elsewhere forget that the D800 debuted at $2995, less than $500 below the nearest competitor, the Canon 5D Mk III. And the D600 was the first FF DSLR offered below the $2000 threshold.
It's very strange indeed to read DPR reviewers and USA commenters below complain about the pricing of the Df considering it is priced smack between the D600 and the D800, two groundbreaking FF DSLRs in terms of value, bodies that Nikon was universally applauded for pricing so competitively.
So if we agree that the D600 and D800 were extremely competitively priced at launch, how do we possibly conclude that the Df has an "eye watering" high price when it's priced between the D600 and D800?
Because the Df is both a little more and somewhat less than a D600?
Jack Simpson: Got the product code, MSRP and MAP :) Now, just waiting for the stores "how much"
Danel: It would be a good deal at half the price.
The Df is by no means a worthy successor to the D700. When the D700 was released it was small package of all the best that was available for pros. Yes, the D700 had a pro like price. The Df is a small package of all that is available from consumers grade FX and Dx cameras yet is has a pro like price.
marike6: So the consensus from DPR is the Df is "a bit silly" camera with an "eye-watering price".
It's funny because when I bought my X-Pro1 kit for over $2300, I don't remember a single mention of high price or any sweeping, overly negative characterizations of the X-Pro1 on this website at all.
And the $2400 EM-1 kit definitely raised a few eyebrows on m43 forum, but I don't remember staff mentioning a single word about high price or value in the EM-1 preview. Hmmm…
But the Df is an extremely exciting camera in my view, one that I will almost certainly buy. I'm just hoping that I can find some more DSLR oriented websites for a proper review before I buy it.
Completely missing the D700 was all pro all the time with pretty much the best of everything available at the time.
SNRatio: Retro is quite fine with me if the priorities are set right: Adequate performance, and function above looks. Nikon has missed out on too much here, to the degree that if I am to keep a "classic" FF body for years, it will still be the D700, not the Df.
* Focussing screen should have been selectable* AF system too simplistic for a "timeless" allround camera* Manual controls are not ergonomically laid out, which reveals that this project is more about fashion than photography* No dual card slots.* Top LCD should have been a bit bigger* No built-in flash is OK, but it should have been replaced by a smallish external flash with a cable* 2 years, really still no improvements from the D4 sensor?* Why no battery grip and chance of going above 5.5 fps?
16MP: Not for landscape shooters. Who is it for?If Nikon had done this well, the price would have been less of an issue. And if they are really serious about this, they will cater for such objections in an Fn-2 or Fn-s update.
There are many D700 landscape shooters doing just fine. Moreover, if a landscape shooter was that interested in MPix they would get the D800. In fact a Df with the same sensor as the D800 would be a unmitigated disaster from a marketing perspective.
The Df is fine for what it is just way too expensive for what you get.
The D700 was pro in every regard not just the sensor.
JackM: Nikon is about to have a Sigma experience with this price tag.
Except the Df is experiencing the same kind of sticker shock. The scale might not be the same but the rationale is sound. This camera was priced well beyond the D600 from which it has the most in common. In fact the Df was priced very near or in some locales more than a D800 despite the D800 being a pro-level camera in all its elements not just the sensor like the Df.
Of course it should be less expensive than the D800!! The D800 is pro-level in all regards not just the sensor.
The Df is a cooler looking D600 around the D4 sensor, so a moderate price increase might have been accepted (despite the missing features like video and flash) but not to this extreme. In fact in the UK you can get a D800 for less than a DF!!! That is silly.
adriantilley: Hipsters rejoice! Honestly, I can't understand why anyone would buy this over a d800...or a d600...
Seriously, you get most of a D600 for nearly the price of D800! That's pure robbery.
Moreover, putting the D4 sensor in retro D600 package is like putting a Ferrari engine in VW Van. The hipsters might think its great but the rest of the real photographers think it is silly.