Leica M and Df and OVF and good coffee and 42.5

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
Just go for it. Plenty of a camera for that price. And if you grow a bond with it, cheap glass available. And then you’ll not look back. {and eventually you’re saving money :rolleyes: }
I've been meaning to ask you @Matero about what's your conclusion or experience so far with M8 vs Df! :)


I might gather that you prefer to shoot your Df a great deal, and you don't report having a huge $$$$ collection of M lenses in your stable so I assume it's not such a big lovefest between you and M as it is between M and me. I'm just assuming and/or fearing that Df is not going to be a huge love for me, not in the extent M is.

Then again, in this hobby polyamory is allowed, even encouraged. 🥰 One thing is for certain: I need to head up to furniture stores because good, clean space for my gear is getting tight...



I decided to open up a new thread as to encourage free expression and multitude of posts and replies about this tangential subject.
 

Matero

All-Pro
Jan 28, 2014
Helsinki, Finland
Yes, you’re absolutely right. I’m biased many ways in this question.

1) I have Nikon film background, my first love affair (in photography I mean) was Nikkormat EL - and it seems I've never recovered totally from it (my Nikkormat is still today sitting in my cabin) and
2) I don't have huge bunch of expensive M glass collecting dust and praying to be used

M8 and Dƒ are so different experiences, you can't compare anything in digital world to M8's original shutter "pooiiingg" - it just makes my knees to bend under me... I had big renovation project on my house, so no M glass for me for a looong time (I could save for Zeiss ZM or buy Voigtländer VM, though 🤔)

Nikon Dƒ then, is it perfect. No, by all means no. But is it perfect for me, maybe. As long as I can shoot with MF lenses with it, I'm a happy bunny. When my eyes will stop serving me good enough, I'm not sure, but I like to think I could live with AF-D 85 and 35.

I see you @mike3996 shoot with Pana m43, maybe that is enough polyamory for you, but maybe it isn't... If I were you, knowing what I know now, I would bite the bullet. It seems that Dƒ is hate-love thing, either you just love it and never give it away, or you just don't get it, and don't understand the fuss about it. But at least then you've tried, and with the price level of 900€ not the end of the world anyway.
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
pooiiingg
In the videos I've seen M8's shutter motor sounds like there's this prolonged buzz after the shutter activates, like there's a film advance thrown in, maybe they had a warehouse full of Motor Winder M parts and decided to reuse them. 🤨

I see you @mike3996 shoot with Pana m43,
I have a practical need for a second system (doctor's orders!) since Leica M lenses mostly can't focus closer than 0.7 meters so I reasoned it's only rational to then experiment with other systems. Besides, without a second camera how could I then take beauty shots of my Leica?! :eek:


Now, M43 has been a secondary system for me for some time now, it started back in winter '18 when I was rocking the Leica Q and Q alone in my camera bag. Pairing a fixed-lens Leica compact with a light weight ILC system made sense and I was able to make it work even.

bite the bullet
Ever since I first picked up the M and witnessed the glory that is the rangefinder OVF I kind of wanted to rekindle the other kind of prevalent OVF, that of the (D)SLR.

Having the ability compose through the TTL, preview DOF and flares and have all this without endless information icons and green focus points and poor resolutions and poorly working eye sensors is something I'd enjoy to try. And seeing what the DSLRs are, out of all the selection Nikon Df must be the most appealing one.

I might start with an autofocus lens, either a normal zoom or then a particular AF lens that would be difficult (or not as enjoyable) to shoot with M. I'm currently having hard time imagining using the plain OVF would be either easy or enjoyable to manually focus. The idea of fitting a focusing screen is most attractive and could very well turn the tables around for good...
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
Nikon F undergoes an exciting process of slowly getting obsolete, and one could expect a gradual stream of F lenses down to the marketplaces. There are some great value screwdrive lenses out there, perhaps in part due to F-to-Z adapters not supporting them?

Much like Leica M lenses were a bargain in early 2000's.

My very own financial reasoning about buying and selling gear used leaves me in a bad situation because I can't explain my GAS away with money. Hoisted by my own petard!

If my buying this camera and selling it 3 months, 6 months, 2 years later costs me 100-200 € in loss of resale value, that's literally pocket money for most of the hobbies out there. We always joke how this is an expensive hobby but since we don't throw our gear in the trash after using it, it's pretty nice.
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
Leica seems to be the only digital camera manufacturer that gets SS dials right. The lenses have 1/2 stop apertures, the shutter speed dial as well! Not one other manufacturer has a shutter speed dial with other than full stops.

Is it true about Nikkor lenses that their aperture rings have clicks at full stops but otherwise are freely turnable to any fraction of a stop?


I was already dismissing the Df for the moment, and yet I reminisce my time with the Fuji X-T series of bodies. It's just plain fun to have all the necessary dials even if the SS dial didn't cover 1/2 stops or 1/3 stops.
 

BrianS

Legend
Jul 7, 2010
Nikon lenses with manual aperture have 1-stop clicks. Never bothered me, in 42 years. If it did: I could use my DS-1 Servo Motors on the F2S and F2Sb, which turn the F2 into shutter-preferred automatic cameras...

With AF lenses you can use the control on the Df to adjust between stops.

Many of the earlier AF-D series lenses are optically superior to the later lenses designed for the digital age. The AF-D Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8 is optically better than the AF-S version. The marketing department probably designed the later lenses, had the software engineers to aberration corrections in post-processing.

The Df is the only DSLR that I use. I have a lot of Nikon lenses.

The biggest issue you will have: focus direction is opposite of Leica.
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
Many of the earlier AF-D series lenses are optically superior to the later lenses designed for the digital age. The AF-D Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8 is optically better than the AF-S version. The marketing department probably designed the later lenses, had the software engineers to aberration corrections in post-processing.
I've read a lot of good things about screw drive lenses. Expecting a lot of bashing, many praise the design. And the lenses are simpler, lighterweight... probably very welcome since the Df is so lightweight body itself, newer lenses make for a front-heavy weight distribution?

A lot of AF-D lenses to be sold because the new F-to-Z adapters can't AF them in Z series.

Inexcusable indeed :D But seriously, I have used a lot of legacy glass on my mirrorless cameras and it confuses my muscle memory bigtime when focus or aperture rings turn in different directions.
This is unfortunate indeed. I don't shoot carefully and I want to let my muscle memory do the focusing for me in the heat of the action. Don't know if I want to mess up my Leica M finger memory...
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
Still on the fence about Df; the focus rotation shenanigans plus not being a Leica keep me securely in considering only autofocus lenses to get my toes wet. AF-D 85/1.8 could be a great first option.
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
For the record, Df is not filling many holes in my lens catalogue...


  • Wide angles < 28mm: RF focusing is superior to other modes of MF. But with big downsides. RF composition and long MFD make these not as flexible or comfortable as I'd like. TTL composition has a clear edge here.
  • Normals 35-50mm: Leica reigns superior in focus speed, focus accuracy, composition. Simply no competition.
  • Normal tele 75-90mm: Autofocus getting more appealing, RF's ability to see outside the frame balances out the smaller view.
  • Tele: 90mm+: Autofocus for enjoyable shooting starts to be a must. Not that I had particularly bad time shooting the 90/4 Elmar-C...
  • Supertele: 150mm+: M4/3 probably wins here, simply because the lenses are lightweight, focus ultrafast and the DOF will be shallow enough.
 

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
Jan 19, 2015
Many of the earlier AF-D series lenses are optically superior to the later lenses designed for the digital age.
Using whatever the preferred euphemism one uses about lenses - "organic"/ the way they "paint pictures"/ "clinical" etc etc - the rendering is IMO so much nicer with pretty much all the older non-G lenses, even though the G lenses are technically almost perfect. Which, for the wallet, is a good thing. The only thing one of the G lenses has over the older ones is the sunbursts. I've never used a lens producing such impressive sunbursts with such ease as those which the 20mm F1.8G renders:

Untitled by Otim, on Flickr

As far as I know, no older Nikkor can do it quite like that.
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Apr 2, 2018
Finland
20/1.8 is an attractive lens also in other regards. Only available as G though? Not the biggest problem still. The price differential to Leica Summilux 21 is considerable.
 

BrianS

Legend
Jul 7, 2010
When using 3rd party lenses- and I do: the AF assist lights on the Df must be reversed mentally. Used with a Nikon lens- the AF assist indicates the direction to move the focus ring to achieve correct focus. With lenses that focus the wrong way- they are opposite.
 

Matero

All-Pro
Jan 28, 2014
Helsinki, Finland
Many of the earlier AF-D series lenses are optically superior to the later lenses designed for the digital age. The AF-D Micro-Nikkor 105/2.8 is optically better than the AF-S version. The marketing department probably designed the later lenses, had the software engineers to aberration corrections in post-processing.
:thumbsup: exactly why I'm only invested to AF-D glass to support manual collection {better aesthetics, too IMHO}
 

BrianS

Legend
Jul 7, 2010
When the D1x was brand-new, I bought one of each of the Micro-Nikkor lenses. That was almost 20 years ago. They are probably the sharpest lenses ever offered by Nikon. 60/2.8 AF-D, 105/2.8 AF-D, 200/4 AF-D, and 70~180 Micro-Nikkor-Zoom.
 
Looking the selection and some lenses rotate sensibly. Is it going to be a Vivitar 24 f/2 MC that demolishes the last few defenses I have?

View attachment 216104
I have a similar lens. Its serial number starts with 22, so it was made by Kiron. It has oil on the aperture blades so it won't close down past f/8; this is quite common for Kiron lenses. Let's say I'm unimpressed by its image quality, but you can check for yourself, here are some quick-and-dirty test shots.

 
Last edited:

Latest threads

Top Bottom