Part time pro shooting youth sports, portraits, real estate, my family, and whatever else. Haven't quit my day job yet.
I have a Leica IIIf that looks just like that. Minus the gold and croc skin of course, but I will part with it for half price - $310,000.
Wow. The new king of res this side of $10,000.
Wow. a7R = the new king of res this side of $10,000.
you can really see the edges fall apart in this photo.
"Our gallery was shot on with the..." sigh.
Seriously. Plop the D4 sensor in the D700 and presto.
Wow, the space race is back on! :-/
marike6, the DF is precisely $1000 overpriced, and that is that.
If it was constant f/2.8 this might have been interesting.
black one has a "hood" on it.
The problem, skyrunr, is that Nikon listened to too many people like you when they built this thing. All they had to do was basically make a FF digital FM2. But then they entertained ideas from...
Nikon is about to have a Sigma experience with this price tag.
Presence of a mirror most definitely does increase the lens->sensor distance. It's called flange distance, look it up.
Presence of a mirror most definitely does increase the lens->sensor distance. It's called flange distance, look it up. Leica and other rangefinder lenses do not work on SLRs for this reason.
Why not? Because you could get a better D610 for $1000 less. Unless you really want to use old lenses.
D610 makes waaaaay more sense. 24mp + video for $1000 less.
So, D610 + a few knobs that should be on every DSLR anyway + optional silver accents + boxy design - video - EIGHT MP + $1000 = DF? No thanks. Maybe if the design was more elegant and compact.
Um, no, Fuji got it right.