The Df is probably too new to be considered collectible, but I wonder if any of the gang here shoot with one?
It seems to be to be *the* DSLR for me. I have a nice set of AI'd, AI and AIS lenses left over from a series of Nikon film cameras (F2, FE, FA). They work fine on my F5 based Kodak 7xx DSLRs. But, that takes me only as far as the last Kodak 6 MP APS-H sensor.
On the Nikon DSLR side, I have (or have had) the E2, E3, D1, D1H, D1X and D2H. After the D2H, I got off the merry-go-round so never did get a D2X or anything newer. I did wrestle with maybe getting a Leica R9 with a DMR which had the last of the Kodak imagers at 10 MP, but never did. Too much money for that setup.
So, now we have what is more-or-less a D4 with 16MP and the full 35mm frame size imager. I know lenses vary and I won't go into a long list of those. This is just an in-general query. How do folks like the Df and/or the D4? Lots of such data on the web but it is all over the map. Seems one either loves the Df or hates it....
Or, misunderstands it. I think one would have had to have shot with an older film body to understand the Df.
Me, that part is exactly what I want. My first 35mm film camera was a rangefinder, then an FE, then an F2, and lastly an FA (which I was still shooting alongside the E3 and the D1). I get what Nikon was up to with the Df.
Heck, if anyone had ever been successful with making a digital back for any of the older film cameras, I'd be using one still. And, this explains why I stuck with the Kodaks. F5 film cameras with digital backs. As close as it came, and as far as they got.
But, I am ready to add one more. And, that Df seems like what I had in mind for the D1 and didn't get.
Plus, some day the Df will be a collectible.

Stan