SOUNDIMAGEPLUS: The Nikon Df is the best digital camera Nikon have ever made. There, I said it.

'The Nikon Df is the best digital camera Nikon have ever made.' There, I said it. Cue - Surprise, Astonishment, Disbelief, Laughter, Derision etc. etc. This is after all a 7 year old camera and when it was released it got a lashing from the photographic 'gurus' of YouTube. Which is of course proof that it is indeed a great camera. As is well known my opinion of them is only slightly higher than a salivating giant space amoeba. Because this is one of the great 'photographers cameras' which obviously puts it beyond the understanding of the bought and paid for (and 'sponsored' by Squarespace) self obsessed idiots who are intent on foisting their grey (or no) hair and poor skin on us. So let's start with what these people found so wrong with it.

Here is the 'Con' section of the review by Dpreview, which like them or loathe them are the most thorough testers out there.

▪ Disappointing AF performance drops off in moderate light

▪ Small coverage area of AF array

▪ Locking exposure comp dial is inconvenient (especially with large lenses)

▪ Inconsistent use of materials detracts from sense of quality

▪ 1/4000th sec maximum shutter speed

▪ No exposure scale or histogram in live view

▪ Viewfinder focusing screen not best suited for manual focusing

▪ Single SD card slot

▪ Battery door prone to falling off some cameras

▪ Combined SD/battery door under the camera awkward for tripod work

▪ Front command dial not terribly comfortable to use

▪ Body is rather large and heavy, considering small grip

▪ Slow AF in live view

▪ No two-button card format option

▪ No percentage battery life/info available

▪ No 'live' aperture control in live view mode presents inconsistencies between lens types

▪ No time-lapse option (available on D610)

▪ No infrared remote trigger option

To be honest, a lot of these aren't really objective but personal criticisms. For example, I don't think it's heavy. I don't think the quality of materials is anything other than top class. The AF is fine for me. I have no issue with the controls. I shot film for many years, you don't get a second chance with that, plus Leicas have only one card slot etc. etc.

So a lot of the criticisms are, as I said, personal. And things change. I had one of these a couple of years after it came out and I loved it. However, I eventually got tired of the grip, which I admit isn't great. However these days there are third party grips and battery grips. So handling is a lot better.

As you will realise I have now bought another one. And getting a decent one isn't easy. Eventually I got one in a kit, with the 50mm f/1.8 lens, It's mint and has only 1600 shutter actuations. It was half the price of what it was when it was released. Now this is remarkable for a 7 yr. old camera, so it shows that they are still in demand. Even though the Df WAS expensive when it first came out. So what are the reasons for this?

1. I wanted a small lighter camera for what I do. I love my D850 and Z7, but they can be heavy, especially with the big zooms I use.

2. For me the most important feature is the image quality. It's unsurprising since this a 16MP full frame sensor. With the size of these pixels the quality is nothing short of astounding and I haven't seen it bettered in the last 7 yrs. As you would expect it's great in low light and I took some test shotes at ISO 3200 and I couldn't see any noise. Remarkable. It also has extraordinary dynamic range and I can restore blocked out shadows without any loss of quality. And the colour. Even its most hardline critics were impressed by it. And the reason for that is that it is almost 100% accurate. I look through the viewfinder, then on the live view screen and then transferred to my computer. And in all cases the colour is exactly the same. For example I've been using it for slide copying and when I compare the slide to the image I have on my screen it's exactly the same in terms of colour balance. Now how many cameras have that accuracy and consistency? I've certainly never come across another one.

3. It doesn't shoot video. I've always believed that adding video complicates results. It's useful if you are a hybrid shooter, but I'm not. This is a camera for stills and should be judged on that alone.

4. It shoots with pretty much every Nikon lens ever made.

5. It looks great. Particularly the silver one.

Now when I bought it I thought that I would use it when I wanted to travel light, but in fact I've been using it non stop since it arrived. I have even considered selling the D850 and Z7 and buying another one, but that hasn't happened yet. Below are some of the images I have produced with it.

So what about the lack of MP's? Well with quality this good you can easily upsize the files. However, I've been reaching the conclusion that in terms of pixel count there is far more focus than is merited on upping said pixel count. As it increases the pixel size gets smaller and smaller. This means that high ISO images get noisier and noisier. On the Df I use ISO 400 as my base. The results are super sharp, super clean and with no noise. Pretty much what you get at ISO 50/64 on other cameras, This means higher shutter speeds, narrow apertures and the possibility of using slow but very useful zooms.

Like everybody else I've chased the high MP count cameras. But ultimately I've found it's definitely a case of diminishing returns. I've always had to compromise. If I use the lowest ISO I'm struggling to get enough DOF and if I raise the ISO I loose quality and add noise. For what I shoot I need high quality images with a decent DOF and that's exactly what the Df gives me. I can't use my D850 or Z7 much over ISO 200 as noise starts to become apparent particularly when I need to work on an image. And that's another advantage of the Df, the pictures come out of the camera with little need for a lot of editing.

I believe that it was unfairly criticised when it was announced because people simply didn't understand it and who it was for. You may have noticed that it hasn't been upgraded or replaced. Now that could be that it didn't sell well, but my suspicion is that Nikon released it as a one off and didn't think they needed to 'improve' it. Certainly raising the pixel count would be a negative move.

So, I will be doing a few more posts on the camera in the coming days.