Sony A7 vs Nikon DF

Winner
Sony A7

70

Nikon DF

58

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony A7

Great image quality
Overall image quality
90.0
High resolution screen
Screen resolution
1,229k dots
Great color depth
Color depth
24.9 bits
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon DF

Screen size
Large screen
3.2"
Low light performance
Low noise at high ISO
3,279 ISO
Lens availability
Slightly more lenses available
171 lenses
Badge
Built-in focus motor
Autofocuses with more lenses

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon DF.

competitors

Sony A7 Competitors

Sony Alpha 7 II

Sony Alpha 7 II

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,000 - $1,598 body only

$1,410 - $1,798 with 28-70mm lens

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Autofocus Faster autofocus
Size Larger
Sony Alpha a6300

Sony Alpha a6300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$794 - $898 body only

$910 - $998 with 16-50mm lens

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Focus points Many more focus points
Screen resolution Lower resolution screen
Canon EOS 6D

Canon EOS 6D

Pro DSLR

$1,049 - $1,299 body only

$1,599 - $1,699 with 24-105mm lens

Battery life Much longer battery life
Autofocus Faster autofocus
Overall image quality Much worse image quality

Nikon DF Competitors

Nikon D3400

Nikon D3400

Entry-level DSLR

$315 body only

$349 - $497 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Lens availability More lenses available
Screen size Significantly smaller screen
Nikon D750

Nikon D750

Pro DSLR

$1,379 - $1,797 body only

$1,956 - $2,297 with 24-120mm lens

Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Low light performance Significantly more noise at high ISO
Nikon D810

Nikon D810

Pro DSLR

$2,188 - $2,797 body only

$2,900 - $3,297 with 24-120mm lens

Overall image quality Much better image quality
True resolution Much higher true resolution
Size Larger

discussion

Sony A7
A7
Sony

Report a correction
Nikon DF
DF
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments