text:
My old 50/1.2 AIS lens has got new life with that camera. Perfect combination. I did love Nikon F3 and Df for me is a great camera and perfect companion for my Nikon D3.
Nikon Df Review
Review based on a production Nikon Df
The Nikon Df is, at first appearance, the camera that many people have been asking for, for years - a classically styled DSLR with traditional external controls. But, for all Nikon's talk of a return to 'Pure Photography,' an awful lot of what's under the Df's confidently retro skin is pretty familiar. The Df is built around the 16MP full frame sensor from the company's flagship D4 with the processor and AF system borrowed from the comparatively affordable D610.
The camera's appearance is inspired by a much earlier generation of film cameras. In fact, from the front the Df looks like an oversized Nikon FM (and not dissimilar to Canon's F1N). And, as well as the styling and dedicated external controls, the Df's other nod to the company's history is the inclusion of a retractable meter coupling tab, allowing the use of pre-1977 non-AI lenses.
For those of us raised on film SLRs the effect is rather intriguing. We understand that the Df has been at least four years in the making, and the glee of its creators is almost palpable in the many specific design cues obviously taken from earlier SLRs including the FM/2 and the long-lived professional-targeted Nikon F3.
Nikon Df key features
- 16 megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor (same as D4)
- ISO 100-25,600 (expandable to ISO 50 - 204,800 equiv)
- Maximum 5.5 fps continuous shooting
- 39-point AF system with 9 cross-type AF points (same as D610)
- 3.2-inch, 921k-dot LCD screen
- Physical shutter speed, ISO and exposure compensation dials
- Compatible with virtually all Nikon F-mount lenses (including pre-Ai standard)
- Single SD card slot
- EN-EL14a battery (quoted endurance of ~1400 exposures)
According to Nikon, the 'F' in Df stands for 'fusion' - specifically, fusion of the old and the new. We know all about the old - the 'retro' styling - which leaves us with the 'D'. This of course stands for 'Digital'. The Nikon Df boasts a full-frame sensor, 39-point AF system and a maximum shooting rate of 5.5 fps. The LCD on the rear of the camera is a 3.2", 921k-dot display and, despite its 'fully manual' pretensions, the Df boasts front and rear electronic control dials alongside the dedicated physical dials on the top-plate. It's a thoroughly modern DSLR for the most part, but with one major difference.
What, no video?
That major difference is video - the Df cannot shoot it (making it one of only two current DSLRs which don't - the other being the Sigma SD1 Merrill). In conversation with Nikon engineers, we were told that video was never on the table as an option for the Df, apparently as much a philosophical point as anything else. This is a serious camera for serious people which is to be used for 'pure photography', not videos (oddly though, the Df still boasts a full complement of retouch options including the decidedly lightweight fisheye and miniature effects).
While it's true that many potential Df owners might not care about video, if you can add a function, why not do so? Since it's based around a video-capable sensor and shares its image processor with a camera that can shoot video, it's reasonable to assume it could be added via firmware, but the question is probably academic, since the Df has no built-in microphone nor a jack for adding one. Equally, the Df's relatively low-capacity EN-EL14a battery wouldn't last terribly long, even if such a feature were enabled.
Df - a D4 in F3 clothing?
If you look beyond the Df's outward appearance, another aspect of its appeal is the relatively inexpensive access it gives to the image sensor used in the company's flagship DSLR, the D4. And while that's true, the omission of video and high-speed frame rates mean you don't get to take full advantage of its capabilities. Even without those aspects, the well-respected low-light capabilities of the D4's sensor should lend some appeal to the Df.
The Df's optical viewfinder is very large - the same size as the D800. The magnification is 0.70x and, naturally, coverage is 100%. We've also shown the viewfinder of the film-era F3 here for reference. As you can see, the F3 offered an impressively large finder, and even the high eye-point viewfinder that glasses wearers tended to prefer was still larger than the Df's. When a DX lens is attached to the Df, the viewfinder shows frame-lines indicating the DX image area.
One real shame (although perhaps not a surprise) is the fact that the Df's focusing screen is fixed. We had hoped for an accessory split-prism focusing screen for manual focus, but it's likely that the additional cost and incompatibility with modern pattern metering modes ruled that out at the design stage. Instead the Df has Nikon's standard 'rangefinder' display in the viewfinder, which uses the autofocus sensor to indicate when it thinks the lens is correctly focused.
Kit options and pricing
The Nikon Df comes in two color options - silver and all-black, and in the USA, both will be available for $2749 body only. Nikon has created a special edition of its AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G to match the 'retro' look and feel of the Df (optically it's identical to the standard version) and this is available separately for $279, or bundled with the Df for $2999.95.
|The Df is being sold with a cosmetically reworked version of the AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G, with some 'classic' (but entirely cosmetic) design accents to match the look of the new camera.
In the UK, the Df is available only as a kit with the 50mm lens, at a suggested price of £2749.99 - only £50 less than the recommended price of the 36MP D800 and revamped 50mm F1.8. Unlike the US figure, this includes 20% VAT, but that still works out as around the equivalent of $3660, even if you take this into account. That said, prices change at different rates in different markets so, once the initial rush of customers has subsided, the prices might begin to look less unreasonable.
If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).
Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.
Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.
To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.
DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.
This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.
Nikon user for 30plus years digital since D100. Very pleased with my Df. I have been using a D700 and love the image quality... but bought a D800 and can say it is the first Nikon I have failed to love it was the first that I could not get good images straight out of the box!.
Logic said that the Df should be good as it uses the D4 sensor etc. and it is. I also like the solid feel, the compact size and lighter weight...... even well balanced with a medium zoom fitted. But it is image quality that really matters and as to be expected from the D4 sensor this is first rate. Most of us tend to develop a set up for controls and settings which we basically stick to so a change to the physical control dials/wheels is not a problem and I can, and do, switch between my D700 and Df easily. So here is one very pleased Df user and one D800 for sale! I have subscribed to the view for awhile that chasing pixels is not important as getting pixels that perform, the Df provides the optimum
A Most Excellent Camera. THE perfect FX camera for my landscapes. Ergonomically complete. No plastic mold feel, wishing it felt just a little bit better. The best of all worlds---small and tough and great sensor. Nikon, please don't stop developing this class of camera.
exelent camera and good review guys, but why you always changing studio scene - maiking impossible to compare with older cameras?
your scene is only capable to compare with modern cameras only! *cry*
It's not about a 'retro look" for me ... it's what it can do for me. It is simply amazing. -- The low-light capability, the full-manual controls, and so
compact compared to the bloated, plastic hulks that are bigger than the 6x6 and 6x7 cameras of yore.
If something were to happen to mine, I would immediately buy another Df black body for fear Nikon might decide to make it a short-run product.
Got a Df today and shot few pictures, results are amazing particularly in low light...
I have the Df since December 24 and I'm happy with it, has its magic
Thank you, David. I played with a Df in a store but they knew squat about it, and got edgy, so I walked. Had my AISs to try, but he didn't understand what I wanted to do. I like to use primes wide open in lots of situations, so aperture priority is nice. Can I use the Df like this with old AIS primes? BTW, I did notice how nice the VF was for focusing (I tried it in a dark corner of the store).
Gone off the OMD-E M10. Sony A7 looks like the sole alternative as I can buy an adapter for my Nikkors, and its full-frame also. Don't know of any other non-Nikon that will do that. Kind of sorry I sold my 85, but it always was a bit short and a bit soft. When I get the body nailed, I might look for a 105 - how does yours shoot on the Df? I looked at a D610, but didn't like it much.
Hi powerglide,
OMD EM10 is tempting to me, a good camera I am sure - an aesthetic triumph. So why have you gone off the EM10? (They should should call it OMD10 and be done with it!)
It's a lot more cost than the old 35mm OM10 that I had in 1981 and mentioned in my other post. Similarly, this Nikon Df is hugely more expensive than the old FM that you have - this Df looks so much like the FM, FE and FG I think from circa 1980. I have just been looking on this site:
and saw the little entry level EM - how cute was that? The equivalent of the OM10. What amazing value those were really at the time.
I have great nostalgia for those old 35mm cameras, though using film is getting more and more tricky, unless you have your own established darkroom set up.
I must say though, that even the entry level DSLRs have so many options that there is plenty for a geek like me to enjoy so one can't complain.
2nd post>…have used the Df's for 5 months>variety of assignments…great camera, sold all my zooms and the 28/50/105mm AIS lens work beautifully on the camera…the camera is far quieter, manual focus with 2.8 lenses, one can focus on ground glass….stunning in low light at 1250….changing ISO and shutter speed without going into the menu is so quick and efficient…by far the best digital camera I have owned…the only ugly thing about this camera is Nikon's picture of it….looks big>it isn't….I own 2…thrilled with these cameras….solid, exceptional body
I think the design and looks of the DF makes it a mans camera…not like the poofy/bling/girly looking stuff around today.
Again…great looking camera.
A real man is not worried about the camera design, but simply does what has to do - using camera for photography :) ;)
What in the heck is a "man's" camera? All cameras are simply cameras that either work for your professional or personal needs or it doesn't. Whether it has rainbows and pink giraffes stamped all over it is of no consequence to usability and image quality.
Advice, please. I will replace my FM (28, 35, 50, and 200. What's making me go digital is the demise of Kodachrome.
Do I toss the lot and get an Olympus OM-D E M10 with the pancake zoom and self-closing lens cap (and no bigger than an old OM-1, which is my second favourite camera after my FM). (I've owned and used a few over the years, starting with a box Brownie, then a Kodak folder, a Leica IIIG, other rangefinders, SRT-101, X7, then came a Nikon F with photomic head, then a Nikkormat FTb, and lastly the wonderful FM, to which I have been faithful for 30 years!).
Best is Nikkor f2/35 that delivers every time on the edge, e.g., in a European cathedral in winter when light is low and Kelvin-shifted. The FM body is good because you can shoot for depth of field and focus, change the speed for available light, then frame, all without looking at the camera controls. Seems both the Df and OM-D can do this. It's the compact size of the OM-D with lens retraced that gives it an edge.
Dear powerglide,
I really liked your post.
If you have spare money, don't get rid of that wonderful Nikon FM. Once lost, never regained.
On another article here, I saw a picture of the Olympus OM-10 and I thought, "Ahhh, that is so gorgeous." I had one in 1981 when I was 15 and wish I had never sold it. I wanted an OM-2N but it was too much to buy with an 80-210 zoom lens, so I went for the OM-10. (Also, I went to buy a new OM-2N one day in Leicester UK and Jessops' huge shop didn't have it in stock - I came home so disappointed. I bought the OM-10 the following week.)
11 years later, I spent about £450 on an OM-4Ti with its fab multi-spot metering and annoying battery drain - but I sill miss the OM-10, because at £89.95 it was fabulous value and with another £15 you could add Manual mode.
I ended up with a couple of nice used OM-2Ns and some lovely Zuiko lenses. I would hate to get rid of them esp my 35 f/2, 85 f/2 and the tiny and gorgeous 16/3.5 fisheye and 21/3.5 superwide.
Since I have the DF ( April this year) I've hardly touched the D and D800 despite their superior AF, fps (D3) and pixels (D800).
Love the size, weight, image quality and high ISO. Great for discreet shooting, and ideally balanced with my old 1.4/50mm Ais, 2/28mm Ais and pre AI 1.8/85mm
Dials not a problem (just like shooting with my old F2AS and FE), nor is the according to the naysayers 'inferior' AF (works without a problem with all my AF D and AFS lenses), still can shoot catwalk under low light conditions with it
Not a camera for the general public nor for the techies, but if judged on its own merits IMO quite a little gem
I wonder why Nikon has overpriced Df. It should have ideally been in the pricing range of D610
The Df is definitely NOT ugly. I started shooting Nikon back in 1967 with a Nikon F....I still have it, along with a Nikkormat EL, an F2S and a myriad of classic Nikon lenses. The Df is perfect for me. I can use all my lenses, plus the newer digital lenses that I have also purchased for my first digital Nikon.
Who the heck needs video on a DSLR?
isn't it odd that trolls don't give their real names...
I find I'm using my Df for 90% of my professional work - the 800 gathers dust. I can't wait for the Df2, which should have a second SDC slot for backup...
Well done Nikon!
A camera for .... photography??
that looks like .... a camera??
Absolutely beautiful concept and camera in the world of products designed for manufacturability and main stream thoughtlessness, coming from the company known for catering to people who know. Ordering with 85mm 1.4D.
Saw it in the store. Has to be one of ugliest, most ungainly cameras I've seen in several decades of being into photography. I owned the original Nikon FE, FE2, FM and FM2's, which were really attractive cameras in their day, and I still keep my old FE2 as a keepsake, but I have to say this new digital Df looks like a Frankenstein. It's just ugly. The thing is, I really like the design of Nikon's other DSLR's, and I've owned a few Nikon DSLRs over the last few years - but this Df looks like it's made of Lego bricks. I'm curious how many of these Nikon have sold, and whether the people who buy them value the appearance of their cameras?
As of last month, Df is still in short supply in Japan. While I still have not had a chance to try it on my hand, the bulkier appearance (taller, thicker, and shorter) than FM/FE series probably will fit me just fine as I'm used to use F3+MD4 and F4S.
I have a Df arriving for test tomorrow since I'm looking for a smaller camera than the D3 I currently use but don't want to jump ship nor need the D800 huge RAW files. I loved how the camera felt in my hands at the reveal here in Croatia back in November and now I look forward shooting a wedding with it to see how it performs in the real situations.
Personally, I love the retro appearance (will opt for a full black one, dough) and the possibility of having the D4 sensor for half the price is just great.
Will post about it next week after I finish testing it.
Retro look, what retro look? I have been using Nikon cameras for 45 years and I have never seen a Nikon like this, it looks weird and boxy. You want to make a retro Nikon then stick to the Nikon F or F3 body style, these cameras fit in your hand like a globe. The Df failed in that category.
I think I've mastered the dails already. Don't like that the whole batt cover plate can come out.
so much less to worry about. just decide on 3 things and compose.
I don't it's for everyone, only those who think they're special. hahahahahahaha
I still find it laughably ironic on how many reviewers complain about the locked exposure compensation dial...when it was Nikon's standard for over 40 years. And just one of the reasons why I DIDN'T buy a Nikon film SLR.
When the locked exposure dial was Nikon's standard, everyone thought it was "normal"; now that Nikon no longer uses the lock, everything thinks that is "normal" - in other words, everyone accepts what is most commonly handed to them [by Nikon] and learn to frown on the alternative.
Strange world.
I believe the dial is only locked in "A". I'll check to confirm. But this point was raised and explained months ago.
I checked, and it's only the 1/3 setting that locks on the exposure dial.
So basically: Not a locking exposure dial.
I noticed the exposure compensation dial can be cumbersome to use, as it's integrated into ISO dial as well. Don't know how FM / FE series were set up, but the F3 was set up exactly that way. And I wasn't a big fan of this (alleged) efficient design.
I saw this camera in real life a few days ago. The touch and fell and its look reminded me of a Chinese knock off of a Rolex watch you can buy in Canal Street.
Did you shoot with the Df? Does the image quality lack? Does it not function well?
Then magnesium by volume is lighter than brass.
I think there's a certain irony that some have complained that the Df looks clunky, an aesthetic problem real, and fake, Rolex watches oft times have.
I have no doubt the image quality is outstanding, yet the main reason someone should buy this camera over a D4 is the look, touch and feel. Nikon failed to provide exactly on those 3 points.
The camera is a far cry from the original FM2 which it is inspired from. Also it is too big for no reason.
The Df is slightly better at high ISO lowlight shooting than the D4, and the Df can be set to shoot more quietly than the D4, so those are reasons to use the Df instead of the D4.
The Df is of course also lighter and less expensive than the D4, so those are two other reasons to buy it instead of the D4.
Making things smaller and just as functional costs monies. Note that the Leica M240 is thicker than the Leica M6.
I love this camera! It is the best I've had by far. The dials are a bit tricky at first but give a lot more satisfaction when shooting.
It is a camera for people who like to tinker and adjust and play while shooting the perfect shot - not guys who take 5000 shots and then choose 2 out of them.
This is not a professional studio camera, it can be used as such but you can't adjust it as fast real-time as 5D, D3x or D4.
I'd recommend it to anyone who loves to take photos. Just add to it a nice 24-70, f/2 and you are good to go!
The only thing that's "bad" on this faboulous camera is: autofocus in low light.
Nikon gave people who clamoured for it a retro camera. It's likely they won't do this again thanks to the reception it's gotten.
Why? Is the Df not selling?
Could it be a better version of many dial control, like the Fuji XT1 or Olympus EM1? Yes?
PLUS: D4 sensor inside a compact D600 / retro body. CONS: EVERYTHING else !
For my kind of work (aerial photography) I need 3 camera bodies. I have a D3, D3x and a D4. Since I have the Df I never leave home without. It's by far the best camera I ever had. The 50mm 1.8 lens is a perfect match as well.
whenever I read these comments, it seems 99% of the people have never used the Df….I now own two, they are lighter, far quieter, smaller than the D700. I sold my zooms and the best feature is that with fast AIS lenses, I can easily focus on the ground glass…I never use Auto Focus, far faster to focus on the ground glass. I hardly look at my menu and the overall body construction is superb…I have shot for 42 years and this is an exceptional camera for travel, coverage of events, weddings…the high ISO quality is exceptional…use the camera and you will love it...
Thank you for making the point about the easy of manual focusing.
EXACTLY!!! I almost didn't buy it after all the negativity around the web.
The first shot is when I decided I don't want to use another one :)
Please advice, which one is better DF or D800e??? I am just occasionally using camera to shoot
It matters what you're trying to shoot and the lenses you plan on using.
It also matters if the best dynamic range (also dependent on the lens) is really important to you.
Will be looking hard at the Df
Oh! lord, did you really love the amateur, more than the photo-artist, you made so many of them ? And lord the 'Egos' please lighten them up.
It was much more fun, when you could pick from the two models that everyone made 'back in the days'. Who needs 64 models vs. 47 models?
Does it make the shutter pusher any better. Are we just paying for R&D ?
Yes I use some really old lenses from Nikon, I've built a mount for a Leica Long Focus, to work with a cheaper Nikon motor drives. It still works, even today.
Digital is nice for those who have to see if the camera really worked and the capture is there. While the world moves on.
My cameras' have taken me to many countries. And I've seen many different peoples through Nikon lenses and will some more.
I do not want to be a troller or such. Maybe I do not understand Nikon philosophy because I do not own one. However, as much as I admire Nikon effort in producing exceptional cameras, I do not find myself a single all rounded camera to fully satisfy me for all conditions. Nikon made a tonne of bodies lately but i do not see a single do it all camera, that I would be ready to grab for all occasions. I.e, the performance body is the D4, but I would not take it with me traveling or to a party, just too heavy and intrusive for some situations. Also the resolution is at its minimum these days (landscape?). D800 is too much resolution and a tad too slow for all condition gear. The D610 sounds promising, but the AF is not quite up there. Really the D700 was THE camera of choice (although a bit low in resolution). Really I would not know what to pick right now for an all condition camera from Nikon. If somebody is happy with a crop sensor I guess the D7100 is excellent, but a no go for me.
to me this is just another wonderful tool that Nikon made in its scattered minded roadmap
There's no such thing as the perfect all round camera, and Nikon wouldn't sell it anyhow even if they knew to make one. This was also true back in the film era.
Drop the idea that 16 MP is limited resolution--it's basically a delusion, and more mega pixels can easily degrade image quality.
The D7100 is fine camera body, and APSC sensors are excellent, this one included, but there's the buffering problem with that particular body.
I think 18-25 mp is a nice range for full frame MP count. 16 is just a tad low. I guess it still depends on the person's use, but for sport photography or where cropping is frequent it does make a difference for sure. Honestly the best all rounded camera on the market right now is the 5DMKIII. It would be nice if it had more dynamic range, but it does get away with what it has most of the times. I find that each Canon camera has a well defined marketing and purpose domain with the 5D being the happy medium. Nikon distribution is more chaotic to my taste, at times some cameras even cannibalize products within Nikon lineup (i.e. D800 vs D3x). Or jumping from the low MP count of D700 philosophy to the extreme opposite of the D800. Not to mention the Df, a no land camera. Do not get me wrong, I think they are all very fine cameras, potentially better then the Canon counterparts, yet the whole picture is not very organic. Some choices seem impulsive and not so well though out.
Ah, one more thing. Sure there cannot be a camera that is best at everything, however you can have a camera that excels at everything, I am not sure why Nikon would not want do make it, as it has shown will to cannibalize its own products for the sake of gaining market share. That would have been the D800 with a D600 sensor and a buffer and speed of the 5D MKIII.
Which is basically a 5DMKIII with improved sensor performance.
The 5D III is a nice camera. But not great at high ISOs and as you say DR lacks a bit. So those are reasons for fewer megapixels in say the 6D or the Nikon D4.
If you know what you're doing, much cropping isn't really necessary. And most people simply don't print at 20 by 30 inches.
Again for all rounded cropping is important. When you are shooting sports it is an very important feature. Have you actually used the 5D? ISO is really good, I am not sure why you insist that is not so much. Let me give you and example of how flexible this body is. I was in Brazil for 2 months I shot from fashion swimsuit to up to my neck deep in a lagoon shooting kite surfers, raw 1080 video, street photography. I cannot think of another camera that could have handled all of that to the same extent. Nikon D4 would have not been an option for some of these situations, like street photography, or no cropping power for kite surfing. I also shot surfing, but I only had a 300+1.4x cropping was important too, and weight was at time too.
I think you're missing my point:
The 5D III is good at higher ISOs, but not great like the Df. (Here the Canon 6D is also better at high ISOs than the 5D III.)
Right, that kite surfing example would be a good place to use cropping, or an APSC sensored DSLR body. Then of course the D800 allows for more cropping than the 5D III, but for either the D800 or 5D III dynamic range limits come into play.
If you're shooting fashion, yes big prints come into play, but that's just not real common.
I have the camera for the past 2 weeks and it is exactly what I am looking for in a camera. I have a D800 and traded in my D3 for the Df.
I will give top marks for to the Df for its image quality, ease of use, and simply gorgeous design.
When fitted with the Nikon 50mm 1.4D, the combi works and looks great. Being able to use the aperture ring again is both nostalgic and exciting.
Top marks also for the retro and yet fully functional design. I agree that Df feels even better with primes.
You know that you can use the aperture ring of AF and manual focus lenses on other Nikon's right? I'm not entirely which, but at least on the D7100, it's an option in the menu under the command dial settings, so the Df is not unique in this respect. The major advantage of the Df as far as lens compatability is the retractable AI tab.
Very disappointed when this was released. Thanks to the rumours, there was me thinking it was going to be a full frame mirrorless camera and instead we end up with another bulky dslr. I would love a smaller camera with a retro (read simpler) layout that doesn't require trawling through menus to setup for a shot. Whilst the layout is 'retro', this camera is just a dslr without video and wifi yet stupidly priced. If only Fujifilm made a full frame camera!
its smaller than other ff dslrs but isnt that small especially since i had the omd em 5 and such mirrorless cameras the sizes are not comparable and that is a definite minus for the df however as for the layout i think i can say you are sort of wrong i have been using the df for about 2-3 months now and i never and i mean NEVER use the liveview menus or layout especially because there is a button or dial for everything i just wished it had focus peaking though the viewfinder is nice big and bright ive been spoiled with my partners red line focus peaking thing on the fuji .........
The menus simply aren't a problem with this camera.
Full frame and then a smaller mirrorless body would mean entirely new lenses. (Like the Sony A7/R).
Wifi is not exactly universal, I believe there are different standards around the world, so it's best to leave it out. Anyhow would add space.
Video takes more power so the bigger battery would add space and weight.
Thru ISO 6400 both the Sony A7 and the Leica M240 are excellent full framed mirrorless systems. (The A7 is a bit too loud, and there still aren't enough lenses, but that will change in years to come.)
That's what the used departments of B+H or Adorama, etc are for.
Or Ebay.
And I think more manufacturers should copy the idea of big sensors with fewer pixels in smaller, lighter, less expensive bodies the way that Nikon did with the Df and to a lesser extent Canon did with the 6D. (And no I've not forgotten the Sony A7.)
I think 6D is as good if not better. Smaller, better AF, video, ergonomics and $1,000 less. Df only better if you need better iso above 12,000. Nothing else really.
6D is nice, but not quite the high ISO performance of the Df.
Also of course, the neither the Df or 6D sell for less than $1000, and that's not going to happen for a while.
Then video in the Df would mean a bigger battery. And there are all sorts of problems with video on DSLRs, some will get fixed, but not this year.
6D is better or equal in pretty much all aspects. No many can justify to spend $1,000 more for a lesser camera just for the look and superior ISO performance for 25,600 and upward. HowaboutRaw, you seem obsessed by extremely high ISO performance, most of us are not.
I admit that high ISOs are important to me. And the 6D sure is good.
But there are Canon sensor DR problems, here Zeiss can help, but then Zeiss helps Nikon too.
I kind of agree that the Df should have been something like a D800 but with fewer mega pixels. (But the knobs don't bother me.)
Also what was the price of the 6D when if first released? It's been out for more than a year, so predictably its price has gone down. Same will happen with the Df in 18 months.
Howabout...you seem to be obsessed with ultra-high ISO performance. What are you shooting? Bunnies by moonlight? :)
I think Nikon should of just made this a film camera than turn one of their DSLRs into a "retro" film camera.
That's what the used departments of B+H or Adorama, etc are for.
Or Ebay.
And I think more manufacturers should copy the idea of big sensors with fewer pixels in smaller, lighter, less expensive bodies the way that Nikon did with the Df and to a lesser extent Canon did with the 6D. (And no I've not forgotten the Sony A7.)
Full Frame sensor in a small body, for half the price of a D4, same low noise at hi ISO as D4, love the camera, even the battery is great ….. there are some not so spectacular reviews but Thom has it right, read what he has to say ……. Berger Brothers beat all prices, and I got a black one with retro lens. ….. love it , can't wait for spring.
Will all my Nikon manual FM2 lens - 23mm 35 70 and 70 210mm work with DF?
Yes, of course. Even older Nikkors or equivalents from other brands (Sigma, Tokina, Vivitar, Tamron, etc.). This is great!, I have a lot of old optics that I was next to bid, but with this camera, I am happy to be able to use them again.
I'm using a bag full of both AFS and AIS glass- love it!
HowaboutRAW, you are still here? Have you bought the SONY A7 yet? It won the Silveraward!
The Sony A7 is really audible, and doesn't have many native lenses.
Also that Sony isn't a great high ISO camera, in year 2014 terms.
Then there's the compressed raw format issue--could be fixed with firmware I'd posit.
no IBIS ?....about time Nikon..
Body based stabilization: Like which other Nikon DSLR?
I assume you made the same point about the Sony A7.
There are a lot of us older photographers that have been both disappointed and thrilled by the trends of the digital camera age. The technology and operational options that have developed with the advent of digital are simply marvelous. However, the film camera industry evolved into cameras like the F3 and F4 that where truly the panicle of basic photographic control. Frankly, it is much faster and easier to set a dial with the graduations labeled on it than it is to push a button, spin a wheel and read a screen. Or worse; dig into a menu. The digital camera age brought about a sort of schizophrenia in the camera industry. The film camera had evolved to an extremely usable state and yet it was as if the manufacturers had forgotten all that advancement and started over by hiring engineering staffs from Fischer-Price for their new digital lines. So, many of us don't see this as a "retro" sales gimmick, but as an apparent return to sanity by Olympus, Fuji, and now Nikon.
Splitting your sentences into paragraphs makes an easier read; you're making interesting arguments that are lost in that single solid mass of words.
WG I think that's the best description i've heard, of how I feel about digital cameras. I'm blown away by the creative potential of digital, but frustrated by menus and screens that don't allow me to take control intuitively. I don't need a retro style camera, but a camera that improves and develops upon where film was. Unfortunately I think the manufactures have gone over board cramming their digitals with functions few people use, because these functions are a marketing tool, and show off their tech. I wish digital cameras were to follow the simple idiom of creative photography 'Less is more'. DSLRs are now so bulky and obtriusive. With a little less digital gubbins and a more manual control the scale could be reduced (along with the price) and a truly usable camera produced. For me the Df isn't it, too expensive for what it is, and no smaller than my D700. The new Fuji XT1 is interesting though, apart from being APSC, and having an EVF it seems to be going in the right direction.
What are you digging through menus for?
I can set my DSLR to M mode and turn off autofocus without digging much, if any.
And with the two wheels by the thumb and index finger, and the focus ring on the lens, I have all the controls I would have on my old Nikon film version of this camera.
What I do have when I go into menus and start looking for extra controls is more power and convenience. After all, I can change ISO on the fly, no need to replace the roll of film. Sure, it's an extra button, but really, does taking this away make it the new "sanity"?
Layered menus tedious at best.
Mechanical dials are totally intuitive.
Now I have a camera that I can use right out of the box!
Our kids instantly took to the Df and quickly understood what the various settings do. They are well versed in typical menu-driven DSLR's but when they saw the Df, my college age daughter said "this is the coolest thing I have ever seen". She took it into our studio and started shooting. Her nine year old sister took right to it as well.
Wow!! What a great tool to teach photography!
This camera rocks and you can throw the stupid manual away.
In my way of viewing technology, if I need the manual, I'm a slave to the technology rather than the technology working for me.
I want total control. I want technology to be as simple as a light switch or the rotary knobs on a cook stove.
Thank you Nikon!!!
I agree as an intuitive tool for learning photography. It is probably good also for who is taking a picture for the pleasure of it. Not so good for quick action. There is a reason why pro bodies do not look like this and evolved in a different direction.
Interesting, did Nikon abandon their standard setting CLS flash system? I don't see it anywhere in the specs for inbody master control - and haven't researched if will function with an SU-800 (or master flash) in the hotshoe. CLS is my backup to PW's since I don't use on body flash which is required a master if not using and SU-800 controller. When used as backup, I use the in camera master and pop-up flash (missing on DF) as trigger, but set to -3 for minimal on camera flash impact since can't turn off and just use pre-flash.
I don't know if I'd buy it (mostly because it's a bit pricier than other full frame cameras), but I am very much in admiration of the camera-styling. To clarify, I don't prefer to call it retro styling because I never fully accepted the puffed up, black plastic cameras of the last 25 years. Yes, yes, of course I purchase these big, black cameras and I love them. But the artist, technician, and manly-man in me says that a camera should look like a camera, and the Nikon DF screams real camera in styling.
I also know my point of view is mostly superficial and that if a camera can do the same or more in a puffy, plastic body, then I should be smart and not throw away a few extra hundred dollars for something that appeals to my eyes.
Function is a priority, but anyone who says style doesn't matter is not being honest with himself. Style is why one guy is able to score more women than an unstylish man of equal wealth and beauty (or lack of the former or latter). Style matters.
There are plenty of stylish cars that don't function well, or drive at all for more than 200 miles without serious trouble. Think 1970s era, some very famous names too.
The style of a camera can make you excited to go out and shoot, for sure.
Nikon Df is still a lot cheaper and better than Leica....so good for us....y the hate?
Sort of true but to get anything close to the optical quality of good Leica M lenses you'll have to use the Zeiss manual focus lenses on this body.
this camera is nothing like Leica, unfortunately.
Why can't canon make a camera that looks like this?
Well, they can... they just do not want to.
thank God at least one company keeps it serious and does not jump in the bandwagon. Showing some marketing strategies that are not attracted by the temporary hypes. Now Canon I love your cameras but just give us a nice dynamic range.... we have been waiting long enough I think....
Canon doesn't have as long tradition of keeping analog ergonomics than Nikon has. Canon sort of abandoned it toward the end of FD mount system production (T-90) and neither on any of EOS series. So, it's probably hard to generate enough demand among Canon users. I also own EOS 5D, BTW.
I was fascinated by this camera ... and even more so after reading the emotional postings by others here.
For one, I appreciate what Nikon is doing. There can certainly not be a single perfect camera, but for my needs, this seems like a good choice. A blend of high tech modern imaging technology in a familiar architecture.
The sort of machine I would enjoy grabbing on my way out the door. My guess is that I could snap the occasional good shot.
Classic remades are a classic fail
Mazda Miata (UK Mazda MX6).
UK MX5, before I hear about it. And it would be nice if these pages actually loaded, the old system worked better.
Absolute statements are NEVER absolute. SOME classic re-mades are a classic SUCCESS!
My favorite cameras of all time
Olympus OM-1, OM-2
Nikon FE, FM2
If this had really been created more in the spirit with the FE or FM2 I would have jumped in with both feet grinning, but this thing is big, bulky, goofy and just blech. I'm disappointed.
The oracle said:
"everything that has a beginning has an end"
I have never touched this camera and never plan to, but it does seem arrogant for Nikon to lower the specs on a camera and give it a retro look and then charge a fortune for it. No wonder it isn't selling well. It really seems like it wants to be one of those "look at me, I have too much money" kind of pompous cameras. I mean why else wouldn't you get a D800.
How are the specs lower?
Above base ISO the D800 doesn't have the dynamic range of the Df. Nor obviously can the D800 shoot as well at such high ISOs.
The Df appears to be selling.
Look if good DR and lowlight high ISO shooting aren't important to you, then there are other options.
Why don't you try looking at the image quality produced instead of the box producing that image.
So I guess the D800 as a bigger buffer and more AF points, but then the D4 bests those D800 capacities.
You know, I like my Df an awful lot, but HowaboutRAW you seem to put in an inordinate amount of time defending this camera. You belabor the same points over and over.
You may be right, but at what point are you going to stop tilting at windmills?
These people aren't interested in liking the Df and no amount of your arguing is going to change that. I agree with you, but damn, your posts are bordering on obnoxious and have gone on to the point of obsession. Dude, relax. It's just a camera, you don't have to defend it's honor.
Yeah, I get that I'm playing Wack A Mole. But the moles keep popping up with the same made up story.
Hope you can see why I'd find the oft repeated line: "The Nikon D800 is a better camera," to be obnoxious.
Just wait for another camera body with features that I respect and others pontificate inaccurately upon.
Haha, I agree with JDThomas. I check this thread out once a day or so just to see what HowaboutRAW wrote this time... it always cracks me up when I read how strongly he defends the DF.
The DF is a good camera with good specs. HOWEVER, Nikon chose to jump on the retro inspired bandwagon and to many it fell flat on its face. Had the DF not been prophesized to be the 'digital fusion' for 'pure photography' it would not have received the reception that it has. Expectations were raised so incredibly high that they only had one place to go.
It's not my fault you believed the marketing claims.
Remember the Microsoft marketing for Windows '95 or Windows Vista? As a camera the Df is better than those products.
Yeah, stupid me... Why should I have thought that Nikon was capable of producing a DSLR that would elicit the same kind of "pure photography" experience of perhaps a Leica M, with the same stunning good looks, and "non-recycled" parts to match...
Oh wait, they released a mini-series of teaser clips suggesting that they could...
Fool me once Nikon, shame on you (I owned an oily D600),
Fool me twice Nikon, shame on me.
The Leica M240 is kinda thick. And still has the dumb hidden single SD card slot. (Yes, if I had a spare $18,000 in the bank, I'd order a M240 and the new M 50mm f/2.0.)
Don't think the oil problems with the D600 (and oil is always a risk with DSLRs) have anything to do with whether or not you personally like the aesthetics of the Nikon Df.
The Nikon Df is easy enough to use; it's just that you'd have to get used to different controls if you're used to a Nikon DSLR like the D600.
Got news, many manufacturers use the same parts in different models--the same is true for computer code. To avoid taking sales from the D4 and D800, Nikon was not likely going to develop an all new AF system for this very all new body.
Again, I didn't watch the marketing video, not likely I'd have believed it anyhow.
If the strong features of the Df (IQ, DR) aren't important to you, and knobs confuse things for you, don't purchase a Df.
Nothing wrong with a single SD slot if you're out there enjoying photography and not doing it commercially.
The oil problems with the D600 and the quickly released D610 have proved that Nikon would rather abandon its customers rather than acknowledge the problem. Clearly you haven't experienced it yourself as you would know that it is far from normal.
To sum up your other comments;
Where did I say I had a problem with the knobs or that I may be confused by them? Re-read my posts as it seems you're confused.
Yes companies reuse parts, however why would they reuse parts that people have already complained about (specifically the APSC sized AF array)?
By not having seen the videos you don't understand why many people feel the way they feel.
I'm not buying a DF. Why? Because of the poorly executed "classic" styling, the unacceptable AF array, and because I would have preferred the sensor from the D800.
Buy a DF and put your money where your mouth is, or are you only a dreamer?
Right now I don't have the money to buy the Df, but I'd sure consider it if I did.
This is where you said you had a problem with the knobs, twice:
First: "I'm not buying a DF. Why? Because of the poorly executed "classic" styling,"
then from above:
"Yeah, stupid me... Why should I have thought that Nikon was capable of producing a DSLR that would elicit the same kind of "pure photography" experience of perhaps a Leica M, with the same stunning good looks, and "non-recycled" parts to match..."
It's the "poorly executed" thing that more than implies you don't like the knobs.
So hope that clarifies.
Now I'm not wedded to AF, since Nikon lenses aren't optically great so I'd avoid them, and I don't shoot sporting events. But indeed the AF is just fine on the Nikon Df. Though: No, not the AF from the D4.
Familiarize yourself with the SD slot on the Leica M240; its singleness aint the real problem.
Above base ISO the sensor from the D800 doesn't have the dynamic range of the Df's sensor, then there's that other thing. So those are really important Df features that the D800 just can't match. As I suspected you don't care about image quality, just specs with bigger numbers.
I'm convinced! The Nikon DF is a fantastic camera, and I am plain wrong for having a personal preference and wanting something different. If only everyone could see the light like you do. Thank you for converting me.
By the way, I DO LIKE THE KNOBS AND DIALS. It's the immediate transition to modern DSLR styling on the back that I do not like, along with the bloated look THAT TO ME makes the design look forced. Yet you implied that I would somehow be intellectually challenged by all the knobs. Stop reading in between the lines, because you're failing.
Different people have different needs. To some the final resolution of the image is of primary importance. You brought up a great point as well with the AF. What if I want to shoot sports or my kids running around? Should I be satisfied by the incredible dynamic range, and how clean the image is, even if it is out of focus?
You don't understand how broad photographers' needs can be. You demonstrate this every time you post.
By all means the Df may not be the camera for you, and I never claimed otherwise.
Clearly every camera has trade offs, the D800 mostly gets in its own way with too many pixels for all but giant landscapes, and then less dynamic range, but it has a strong AF and likely a deeper buffer than the Df. Whereas the Df has different strengths.
It's not like a D610 is some great sports camera either. Then there was sports photography before AF.
Now in the digital era to improve the chance of players and the ball being in focus: One trick of course is to use greater depth of field, and cameras that have better high ISO image quality help in that respect.
Nor am I reading between lines to say that you objected to the Df's knobs, when you broadly objected to the design–only now raising specific points.
The Leica M240 has all sorts of buttons on the back akin to the back of the Nikon Df.
I've no idea where you get the idea that one camera can do everything.
Double yawn! I look in once a week or so and the dear old boy HowaboutRAW is still beating his meat about the Df low light performance..round in circles, situation normal.
And evidently you didn't read my above comment.
I'll explain since you clearly don't understand: "dynamic range" is not the same thing as good high ISO performance. Though since you brought it up, yes the D4 has better dynamic range at high ISOs than the dynamic range of the D800 at high ISOs–but that's obvious.
Some people, not you, care about colour in colour photography.
and has a hide like a rhinoceros, sarcasm just bounces straight off unnoticed..
You're not using the word "sarcasm" there correctly, your inability to lucidly read my point has mislead your apprehension.
So look up "sarcasm" when you look up the term "dynamic range".
You've been watching Star Trek again and the famous split infinity..
'inability to lucidly read my point has mislead your apprehension.' This sounds like G Bush on a bad day: 'My enemies mis-underestimated me...'
Ah JaberW:
You don't know that the "split infinit[ity]" rule is one made up from Latin grammar, where infinitives need to come before the nouns they modify.
There's no such rule in English, only a forced style that has nothing to do with actual English grammar.
The point remains that you need to look up "dynamic range" and "sarcasm".
More bull from a guy paid by Nikon to spam the forum 24-7 365.
Get a life buddy!
I just love yanking you chain babes! You bite the bait every time and don't even notice your hampden being pulled like all wooden trolls.
Good point. While I agree with the ergonomics preferences of the Canon that Scott Kelby spoke of, it is quite clear Nikon is clearly well ahead of Canon when it comes to sensor improvements. For me, image quality is what matters the most. For him, he needs speed and apparently the Canons are better suited for that from an operational point of view.
So much BS spouted by broken records of fanboi hype...
I think to say that any photographer would NOT be concerned about Image quality is a bit of a stretch. I suspect that Kelby values image quality as much as anyone else. However I suspect that he hasn't bought into the Nikon fanboy hype, recognizing that from an IQ standpoint the output of whichever two Canon/Nikon devices he is comparing is going to be essentially indistinguishable which is the reality.
Not paid by Nikon, and more to the point I don't think Nikon would want to pay me. If you've read what I wrote, which you appear not to, you'd apprehend that point.
In case you haven't read, Nikon has been planning Df since 2008. Though it originally planned to release in 2011, the Tohoku Earthquake (East Japan Earthquake) of 3/11 damaged Miyagi Nikon facility, delaying the release until the end of 2013.
I have read what Nikon engineers responsible for designing Df had to say and the trouble with finding suppliers of back-then-common molding subcontractors and material suppliers. The carving of shutter dial that can do right, and the final compromise in using magnesium surface was another.
I happened to be in Tokyo when the earthquake came, and went over to Sendai where Miyagi Nikon is located. Little did I know they were planning Df then.
Sorry folks, I have very bad news for most of you. My Df is a wonderful camera, and this review and most of its followers seem very prejudiced. I have been using my Df on pro shoots in parallel with my D800 as well as using it as a carry-around.
DPR has fallen below its high standards with this review. My Df is NOT awkwardly placed on my tripod. The EV dial lock is NOT inconvenient. I do NOT need two-button formatting. The Df's body is NOT large and heavy for FX and 1/4000th is NOT too low. Materials do NOT lack quality feel. I could go on.
As I said in my previous post the main point here is that all cameras are compromises. The Df's reduced size does not leave room for a second card and the larger battery needed for video. The front dial is a retro-quirk but hey, folks, you know what? Yep, that's right, it works!
For me the magnifying RGB histogram and the independent flash adjustability absent on most Nikons (inc. the D800) are absolutely vital - my Df has both.
Enjoy it!
Now, now, calling attention to features on the Df not included in the D800, quote:
"For me the magnifying RGB histogram and the independent flash adjustability absent on most Nikons (inc. the D800) are absolutely vital - my Df has both."
Must mean you've actually used the Df and understand some of its strengths and the importance of having access to data about the images recorded, hence mention of the magnifying RGB histogram.
You mean that every camera can't have every feature and be everything to every user, surprised not.
P. S. To clarify (apologies for my sloppy ambiguous English) one point - the D800 does of course have a magnifying histogram which I use a lot, but its flash cannot be independently programmed.
Thanks for the clarification, I'd have skipped posting if that point had been clear. And I was surprised that the D800 didn't have that feature.
Anyhow, nice to see some reporting from someone who has had the Df for a few weeks or a month now--someone who also owns a D800.
As seen on another camera forum..
'The Nikon Df thread has unfortunately been hijacked by techno geeks who apparently photograph brick walls by moonlight and then endlessly argue the toss on resolution. There hasn't been a sane post there for while. Lots of emotional 'Nikon FF is great' postings with opinions varying between 1/4- 1/2 baked. In reality most of the posters have never seen a Df beyond the DP review pages..'
Seem mighty sure of yourself.
You're going by internet claims about internet claims; claims about claims which just happen to agree with your claims--irony there.
J, you sure appear to be one of those people who haven't shot with the Df.
At first I was pumped about this camera, then real disappointment came to me when I first held it - I expected it to feel as solid as my FE2, instead it feels like an N80 in my hands - light and fragile. Then I learned about its gimped feature set and I was nearly sick. It's disgusting how much praise this camera has garnered. It is a gimped, overpriced, retro-look DSLR and nothing more. The lack of video capability, fixed focus screen and light, unsolid feel are inexcusable. What is the point of making a retro-looking DSLR then gimping it to the point where using many excellent, fast, old lenses is not realistic because it is nearly impossible to focus them? Getting accurate selective focus on an old <f2 lens is nearly impossible without a split prism or microprisms. The "dot" and rangefinder don't cut it.
Were you really expecting the Df to have the auto focus system from the D4? And the D4's buffer?
The focus screen on the D700 could be swapped at a service center. So it sure looks like you can get a split screen for use with that old f/2.0 manual focus lens.
Dynamic range above base ISO is a good bit better with the Df than the D800 (and the D800 appears to use the same focus screen set up), then there's the high ISO low light capacity of the Df, which the D800 can't match.
Video takes more battery power and has some AF problems on may DSLRs–though you can get a D610 if you like.
Magnesium is lighter than brass. Feels plenty solid to me. And magnesium is far from "fragile".
Look, it's fine if you really don't like the aesthetics or really really want to be able to switch focus screens out in the field on your own, but making things up isn't helpful.
Have you shot with the Df?
My Minolta SR-1 doesn't have a split prism and still manual focus works with fast lenses.
Who cares about video capability? If you want to shoot video, buy a video camera. IMHO, the Df is a step in the right direction for Nikon, but it doesn't go far enough. To an old school guy like me, 90% of the "features" of most DSLRs are superfluous junk that do nothing useful and only add to the cost and complexity of the camera - video capability especially so. I'm paying for things I don't need, don't want and won't use, and that doesn't make me happy.
If Nikon were to take the D800e's sensor and build something around it that actually looks and feels like a classic film camera - say an F3, for example - with only the traditional controls in the traditional locations (including a real shutter with an actual wind lever), I guarantee I'll be the first in line to buy it.
Not a bad idea, but I'd avoid the D800's sensor, not great DR above base ISO is a big problem. A film advance lever to reset the shutter sure could quiet things.
How about the film advance lever to turn the camera on and off.
I will be getting the Df. I learned on The 'F' back in high school in 69 and I still put a roll of film thru it every year.
I use a vintage micro Nikkor with an aperture coupling fork and manual focus on my D200 and have no focussing issues at all. I focus by eye then use the green spot to get it dead on. Anyone who complains that you can't do the same with a Df either hasn't used one or tried.
Connect with dpreview


text: What would you bring to survive a mayo jar challenge? By Kimi Matthews For the Salisbury Post Sunday, June 23th, 2013 Text size: A A A Tweet Back To Story After the mayo jar challenge participants survived a night in the national forest, they posed for a photo. From left are Bob Harris, Kimi Matthews, Joseph Cataldo, Mike Bates and Paris Goodnight.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?.
Soon, Mahal turned his multicultural vision of the blues even further outward. The live 1971 set, The Real Thing, finds him still carrying the Mississippi torch, while adding overt elements of jazz and Afro-Caribbean music to its flame. But it's overreaching. His band sounds under-rehearsed, and the arrangements seem more like rough outlines. Nonetheless, these albums set the stage for Mahal's career. (For a condensed version, try the fine The Best of Taj Mahal.) Today, he continues to make fine fusion albums, like 1999's Kulanjan, with Malian kora master Toumani Diabate, and less exciting but still eclectic recordings with his Phantom Blues Band. --Ted Drozdowski


text:
The BMC Racing Team spent the majority of GP Jef Scherens chasing a large breakaway. But the big effort paved the way for Alexander Kristoff to sprint for an eighth-place finish.
Kristoff, Karsten Kroon Battle To Finish
After a group of 32 riders escaped after 30 kilometers, the BMC Racing Team led the pursuit, keeping the gap within 90 seconds. "Danilo Wyss, Martin Kohler and Michael Schär did a good job helping with the pursuit," BMC Racing Team Assistant Directeur Jacques Michaud said. The break split on one of the final laps of the circuit, with Lars Boom (Rabobank) winning. Kristoff was second in the field sprint.


text:
I cut into the pie basically the second 30 minutes was up. It was a bit runny but I didn't care in the least. Easily one of my most favorite pies I've ever had, or ever made! Absolutely adore this recipe and I found myself craving another pie a day or two after the first one [yes, a day or two after ;) ].
I know better than to cut into a warm pie. I did it anyway.


text:
This work is supported in part by the George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) Program of the National Science Foundation under Award Number CMMI-0927178. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
All rights reserved.
XHTML and CSS compliant.


text:
Life Rolls On Organization Poker Night...
On May 7, 2011, the Life Rolls On (LRO) organization held a poker tournament at the Hustler Casino in Gardena, CA to further its cause in improving the quality of life for people affected by spinal cord injuries. Poker legend Annie Duke and LRO founder, Jesse Billauer, made a joint effort to make this tournament happen. With 12 tables of 9 set up for the poker tournament, many showed up for the cause as the proceeds from their registration dues are to be donated to the Life Rolls On foundation. Starting from 6 PM, participants gradually filled out the tables and the times rolled on. For the event, Hurley and Flexfit teamed up to provide custom caps for each participant. Celebrities were also in sight including former professional tennis player Mark Philippoussis, famed actor Scott Caan and Grammy-award winning musician Jason Mraz. The 1st place prize was a $10,000 seat at the 2011 World Series of Poker Main Event.
Life Rolls On is a subsidiary of the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation. Its mission is to incorporate action sports as a tool to inspire those with spinal injuries and disabilities. In 1996, Jesse Billauer (founder of LRO) suffered a traffic spinal injury while surfing. Through his unyielding perseverance, Jesse continues to surf today and his story is an inspiration to all. The organization serves as a ray of light for those who are enduring paralysis. Life will always roll on.


text:
This morning, bells will ring for the 26 victims who died at the hands of a gunman Dec. 14 in Newtown, Conn.
According to the city of Cartersville, local churches will be ringing their bells 26 times this morning at 9:30 a.m. in memory of the 20 children and six adults from Sandy Hook Elementary School.
Rebecca Bohlander, city of Cartersville Communications and PR manager, said, "All the ones that have been contacted are participating. The county is going to ring the one at the [Bartow County Government Annex]."
The Bartow Baptist Association also contacted churches in the county to take part in the memorial.
According to the Associated Press, "... The Georgia Municipal Association sent an email to its members urging them to consider it."
"We just made them aware of what Mayor Copeland was doing and passed along his request that every city consider taking a similar action," said Bill Thornton, deputy executive director of the Georgia Municipal Association.
In Athens, students will ring the University of Georgia Chapel bell 26 times, the university announced Wednesday.
Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy has proclaimed Friday a day of mourning. Some churches outside Connecticut and Georgia have also announced plans to ring their bells Friday morning.


text:
Allergy Relief
Read More About
Allergy Relief Mattress Pads and Protectors
Allergy sufferers know the feeling of waking up with a stuffy nose, itchy eyes and headaches all too well. Keep your bed dry, clean and free from irritants with and allergy relieving mattress cover. End the discomfort and start waking up rested and refreshed with our great selection of products.
If you experience discomfort while sleeping because of allergies, have chemical sensitivities or skin irritations, the Organic Cotton Allergy Protector is perfect for you. Encase your mattress, box spring, comforter and pillows with this allergy protector made from 100 percent certified organic cotton, and you'll finally enjoy a full and relaxed night's sleep. This is the most natural bedding protector you can get without sacrificing comfort or quality.
Sleep easy knowing the Bed Bug Protective Cover Set will deter this annoying and hard-to-find pest. The premium bed bug protector has a stretch-knit cover to create an impenetrable, bite-proof fabric barrier. Designed with a soft and silky surface, it's both comfortable and quiet, for a sound sleep with unmatched protection.
Made from virgin wool, the Imperial Wool Mattress Pad delivers cloud-like comfort. Assembled with 100 percent American wool, the Imperial pad is 1-1/4", allowing you to sink into comfort night after night. Wool acts as a natural thermostat, wicking away moisture on hot nights and working as a natural insulator during cold months.
The 100 percent cotton allergen control Dust-Mite Proof Protectors/Covers shields your bed from harmful allergens so you can get a great night's sleep. Made without added chemicals, harsh treatments or sticky coatings, this protective cover features a patented membrane-free cotton fabric with microscopic pores that keep allergens out.


text:
Please confirm that your email address is correct, so you can successfully receive this alert.
The authors are affiliated with King's College London, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry. Send correspondence to Prof. Slade at Institute of Psychiatry, Box P029, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, United Kingdom (e-mail: email@example.com).
Copyright © 2013 by the American Psychiatric Association
Mental health systems internationally have adopted a goal of supporting recovery. Measurement of the experience of recovery is, therefore, a priority. The aim of this review was to identify and analyze recovery measures in relation to their fit with recovery and their psychometric adequacy.
A systematic search of six data sources for articles, Web-based material, and conference presentations related to measurement of recovery was conducted by using a defined search strategy. Results were filtered by title and by abstract (by two raters in the case of abstracts), and the remaining papers were reviewed to identify any suitable measures of recovery. Measures were then evaluated for their fit with the recovery processes identified in the CHIME framework (connectedness, hope, identity, meaning, and empowerment) and for demonstration of nine predefined psychometric properties.
Thirteen measures of personal recovery were identified from 336 abstracts and 35 articles. The Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) was published most, and the Questionnaire About the Process of Recovery (QPR) was the only measure to have all items map to the CHIME framework. No measure demonstrated all nine psychometric properties. The Stages of Recovery Instrument demonstrated the most psychometric properties (N=6), followed by the Maryland Assessment of Recovery (N=5), and the QPR and the RAS (N=4). Criterion validity, responsiveness, and feasibility were particularly underinvestigated properties.
No recovery measure can currently be unequivocally recommended, although the QPR most closely maps to the CHIME framework of recovery and the RAS is most widely published.
Personal recovery is "a deeply personal, unique process of changing one's attitudes, values, feelings, goals, skills and/or roles. It is a way of living a satisfying, hopeful, and contributing life even within the limitations caused by illness" (1). An orientation toward personal recovery is central to mental health policy in Australia (2), Canada (3), England (4), New Zealand (5), the United States (6), and other nations (7).
If recovery is the policy orientation, then measures to assess the impact of interventions on recovery are needed. However, definitions and conceptualizations of recovery vary (8). This variety makes it difficult to make decisions about what should be measured. To measure recovery as an outcome in mental health, a conceptual framework must be developed that encompasses the best available evidence on recovery processes. A conceptual framework is a network of interlinked concepts, each playing an integral role, that provides a comprehensive understanding of a concept (9). Frameworks for understanding how recovery unfolds, such as the personal recovery framework (10) and the RECOVER framework (11), have been developed.
More recently, the CHIME framework for personal recovery was developed through a systematic review and narrative synthesis of recovery (12). The framework consists of three superordinate categories of recovery: characteristics of the recovery journey, recovery processes, and recovery stages. The acronym CHIME derives its name from the recovery processes identified by the framework, namely connectedness, hope and optimism, identity, meaning and purpose, and empowerment. This conceptual framework allows measures to be evaluated for the extent to which they measure recovery rather than other aspects of good practice in mental health services.
Mental health problems and recovery are influenced by social factors (13). According to some, this means that mental health services should focus on the core business of treating illness. Others argue that, in the future, mental health professionals will need to better support access to community resources (14), becoming social activists involved in challenging discrimination in wider society (15). Whatever the future, adequate measures of recovery are needed. Recovery has two distinct components—recovery as experienced by the individual and the support for recovery offered by the mental health system. This study focuses on recovery as an experience. Notably, a systematic review of measures of recovery orientation found an absence of usable measures (16).
Several compendia of outcome measures have been published. Some have a broad focus on outcome (17), and others relate to specific populations, such as persons with addictions (18) and schizophrenia (19). Compendia with a specific focus on recovery are also available (20). Three recent reviews of recovery measures have been published. The first looked at the suitability of 33 recovery measures for an Australian setting (21) and recommended four measures for future consideration: the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) Scale (22), the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) (23), the Recovery Process Inventory (RPI) (24), and the Stages of Recovery Instrument (STORI) (25). The review concluded that further work was needed to determine which, if any, of the measures is suitable for routine use. The second review looked at measures of recovery from psychosis (26). It identified six measures for consideration: the IMR, the Psychosis Recovery Inventory (PRI) (27), the Questionnaire About the Process of Recovery (QPR) (28), the RAS, the RPI, and the STORI. The RAS was identified as most published, and the QPR was the most favored by service user consultants. Further research for investigating reliability and utility within clinical settings is needed.
The third review identified 13 measures of recovery for schizophrenia and judged the RAS to be the best of the reviewed measures (29). To date, no review of recovery measures has used a full range of data sources (including conferences and Web site repositories), included ratings of articles' eligibility by two researchers to improve quality assurance, included a flow diagram consistent with reporting guidelines (30), or operationalized the definition of recovery.
This literature review aimed to identify measures of personal recovery, evaluate the extent to which the identified measures focus on aspects of recovery defined by the CHIME framework, and characterize the psychometric properties of each identified measure.
Searches were conducted by using six data sources. First, eight databases were searched from date of inception to May 2012: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, CSA Illumina, TRIP, CDSR, and DARE. The search terms were divided into four domains—personal recovery, mental illness, measure or instrument, and psychometric properties. The terms were identified from the title, abstract, key words, and medical subject headings (MeSH). The search terms were amended for each database as necessary. A copy of the full list of search terms is available from the first author.
Second, 11 Web-based repositories were searched by using the terms "personal recovery," "mental health," and "measure." The repositories were the Department of Health (www.dh.gov.uk), the Scottish Recovery Network (www.scottishrecovery.net), the Centre for Mental Health (www.centreformentalhealth.co.uk), Recovery Devon (www.recoverydevon.co.uk), the Repository of Recovery Resources (www.bu.edu/cpr/repository/index.html), Mind (www.mind.org.uk), Rethink (www.rethink.org), the National Mental Health Development Unit (www.nmhdu.org.uk), the Mental Health Commission of New Zealand (www.mhc.govt.nz/), the Mental Health Commission of Ireland (www.mhcirl.ie/), and the Mental Health Commission of Canada (www.mentalhealthcommission.ca/).
Third, a search of Google Scholar (www.scholar.google.co.uk) was conducted by using the terms "personal recovery," "mental health," and "measure." Fourth, abstracts from three international conference series were searched by using the terms "personal recovery" and "measure." The conferences were biennial conferences of the European Network for Mental Health Service Evaluation (1994–2010), annual meetings of the American Psychiatric Association (1999–2009), and Refocus on Recovery conferences (2010 and 2012). Fifth, the table of contents was searched by hand for the following journals: Psychiatric Services, International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, and Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal. Sixth, reference lists of included papers were assessed for further measures.
Articles were included if they involved the use or validation of a measure of personal recovery, were published in either peer-reviewed or non–peer-reviewed publications and were Web accessible, and involved a population of working-age (ages 16 to 65) adults with a diagnosis of any mental illness other than an eating or substance use disorder.
Data were extracted by the first author. Results from the search were stored in Endnote × 4. Duplicates were removed. The results were then sifted to exclude papers by title or by language. The abstracts of papers that were included by title were sifted further, allowing for exclusion by abstract. Excluded abstracts were also rated by a second rater (JW) to assess reliability. A concordance level of 98.2% was achieved. If the abstract was judged to be relevant, the full paper was reviewed and a copy of the measure was obtained. A decision was made whether to include the measure.
To evaluate the extent to which the identified measures focus on aspects of recovery, four raters independently compared the measures to the CHIME framework. Each item on the measure was mapped to one of the five CHIME framework categories, if possible. Items covering more than one domain were assigned to the domain that it represented most. Items that did not map, and, therefore, did not assess personal recovery, were counted as not mapping. A concordance in allocation to CHIME category of over 70% was achieved between raters.
Each measure was evaluated for nine psychometric properties by using criteria modified from several authors (19–21). For each property, the measure was rated positive (adequate demonstration), indeterminate (inconclusive evidence), negative (inadequate demonstration), or not enough information (no evidence available).
From 336 abstracts reviewed, the search identified for inclusion 35 articles, which described 13 measures. Eight articles described measure development, nine were reports of psychometric properties, 16 articles described studies that used a measure as part of outcome assessment, and one article compared measures of personal recovery and clinical recovery. One measure, the Stages of Recovery Scale, was unobtainable and was excluded from analysis. The 12 measures are described in Table 1. [A flow diagram of the identification of the measures is available online as a data supplement to this article.]
All measures are rated by service users, and the IMR also has a clinician-rated version. The two measures cited most widely in the search were the RAS and the IMR. The RAS appeared in 13 articles, including four describing psychometric properties, eight describing use as an outcome measure (three studies each from the United States and Australia and one each from Canada and Sweden), and one comparing consumer-defined and clinically defined recovery measures. The IMR appeared in eight articles, including two describing psychometric use and six describing studies that used it as an outcome measure (one each from Sweden and Israel and four from the United States). The only other measure used as an outcome assessment, by two studies from the United States, was the Recovery Markers Questionnaire (RMQ) (31).
The mapping of items from each measure to the CHIME framework is shown in Table 2. The QPR was the only measure to have every item map to the CHIME conceptual framework and the only measure to have at least 10% of items in each category.
a IMR, Illness Management and Recovery Scale; MARS, Maryland Assessment of Recovery; MHRM, Mental Health Recovery Measure; PRI, Psychosis Recovery Inventory; QPR, Questionnaire About the Process of Recovery; RAS, Recovery Assessment Scale; RMQ, Recovery Markers Questionnaire; RPI, Recovery Process Inventory; RS, Recovery Star; SISR, Self-Identified Stage of Recovery; SIST-R, Short Interview to Assess Stages of Recovery; and STORI, Stages of Recovery Instrument
Three measures (the Mental Health Recovery Measure [32], the RMQ, and the Self-Identified Stage of Recovery [33]) were not included in any psychometric or scale development articles and, therefore, were excluded from psychometric analysis. Three measures were included in more than one psychometric article (the RAS, four articles, and the IMR and the STORI, two each). Findings from all articles were included in the evaluation. The psychometric evaluation of measures is shown in Table 3.
a A positive evaluation indicated adequate demonstration of the property. IMR, Illness Management and Recovery Scale; MARS, Maryland Assessment of Recovery; MHRM, Mental Health Recovery Measure; PRI, Psychosis Recovery Inventory; QPR, Questionnaire About the Process of Recovery; RAS, Recovery Assessment Scale; RPI, Recovery Process Inventory; RS, Recovery Star; SIST-R, Short Interview to Assess Stages of Recovery; and STORI, Stages of Recovery Instrument
b Intraclass correlation coefficient
The measure with positive ratings for the highest number of the nine investigated properties was the STORI (N=6 properties), followed by the Maryland Assessment of Recovery (MARS) (34) (N=5); the QPR and the RAS (N=4); the IMR, Recovery Star (35), and the RPI (N=3); and the Short Interview to Assess Stages of Recovery (33) (N=2). The psychometric properties demonstrated by the most measures were content validity (N=9 measures), internal consistency (N=8) and test-retest reliability (N=7). The least demonstrated properties were criterion validity (N=0), responsiveness (N=1), reading age (N=1), and feasibility (N=2).
A total of 13 measures of recovery were identified. The QPR had the strongest match with recovery, the RAS was the most widely published, and the STORI, the MARS, the QPR, and the RAS demonstrated the widest range of psychometric properties. All measures were also identified in at least one of the three recent reviews of recovery measures mentioned earlier (21,26,29).
Although recovery has become a widely used term in health services research, inconsistency in its meaning and operational definition has obscured the clarity of the concept. It has been said that its scope can "make a cow catcher on the front of a road train look discriminating" (36). This review has found that the CHIME framework could be used to evaluate the extent to which a measure assesses recovery rather than other aspects of good practice.
In general, the findings of this review concur with other work in this area, namely that no measure has been subject to a substantial and robust psychometric evaluation. The content validity of all the measures had been addressed during development through the use of service users, supporting the findings of Campbell-Orde and colleagues (20) that measures were largely based on consumers' views and experiences. However, as shown in Table 3, the psychometric evaluation showed a less consistent focus on other aspects of validity and on reliability and feasibility.
The lack of measurement of responsiveness is an issue for self-report measures. It is crucial that measures demonstrate the ability to detect change over time, for both clinical or research purposes. The findings indicate the need for a gold standard measure to assess criterion validity.
This review had three strengths. First, the methodological rigor advances the field by using more sources of data than existing reviews (21,26,29) and double ratings of eligibility as a quality check, by including a flow diagram, and by operationalizing the definition of recovery. Second, although existing reviews included staff-rated measures and measures of recovery orientation, there was substantial overlap between the measures identified in this review and earlier reviews. Third, the distribution of country of development for the measures (Table 1) supports the view that recovery conceptualizations—at least as present in English-language sources—have primarily emerged from the English-speaking world (37).
The review had three limitations. First, it excluded non–English-language papers, possibly missing some measures. Second, the term "personal recovery" is not a MeSH heading in databases, and, therefore, the search may have lacked some specificity and missed some measures. The use of the large number of search criteria aimed to counter this possibility. Finally, applying the CHIME framework is a subjective process that depends on individual interpretations of the measures and the meaning of each item. Each CHIME category contains many subcategories (12), so a measure may not adequately assess a category if only a small number of items map to it. A measure's uneven coverage of the CHIME categories means that the summary score emphasizes different components of recovery. CHIME also represents only one conceptualization of recovery, and the use of other frameworks or conceptual backgrounds may have resulted in different findings. Several measures have items not mapping to CHIME, possibly because these items represent nonrecovery elements of best practice or because CHIME needs to be extended to incorporate other recovery processes. Although the CHIME framework captures an understanding of recovery within the English-speaking world (37), its wider applicability is unknown.
The challenge in mental health services is developing a system that is based on the views of service users about how their recovery can be supported. Problems with conceptual clarity and inadequate psychometric testing of recovery measures are barriers to meeting this challenge. Having a clear understanding of the conceptual basis of recovery is necessary to enable service providers to provide recovery-focused interventions. If a service is to be recovery focused, the interventions need to be oriented toward this goal. Whether mental health services should be judged in relation to their recovery orientation or by change in service recipients' experience of recovery is an important scientific and clinical question. Stronger measurement tools are needed for either approach.
It is also necessary for service providers to be able to identify the resource implications of using recovery measures in routine outcome assessment. The development of consensus on how recovery is measured will allow investigation of the resource consequences of transformation toward a recovery orientation. In order for recovery measurement to advance to the next stage of scientific development, it will be necessary to refine theoretically defensible (38) and psychometrically adequate measurement tools that address recovery-specific evaluation issues (39).
This review has identified three knowledge gaps to inform future research. First, no measure has yet had a complete psychometric evaluation, although the RAS and the QPR have the strongest evidence base. Future research of recovery measures must specifically include sensitivity to change. Measuring change will involve an empirically defensible conceptualization of recovery as a construct—for example, whether it is a continuous process or occurs in discrete stages—and the methodological rigor to ensure best practice in evaluation (40). Second, there is a clear need to identify a "gold standard" measure for assessing criterion validity. Finally, measures need to be evaluated for a range of service settings, clinical populations, and languages.
This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (grant RP-PG-0707-10040) and in relation to the NIHR Specialist Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, and to the South London and Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health.
The authors report no competing interests.
Download citation file:
Web of Science® Times Cited: 5


text:
Comments for
Sources: Spec ops funding likely to be 'reined in'
Add your comment
Guidelines: You share in the airforcetimes.com community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. If a comment violates these standards or our terms of service, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse.
We're using Facebook Comments on articles to create a more civil environment for conversation. To find out more, please visit the FAQ.
Start your day with a roundup of top defense news.
U.S., South Korea delay transfer of wartime control
October 23, 2014
Prisoner in Afghanistan to be tried in U.S.
October 23, 2014
Experts call for national debate on U.S. military priorities
October 23, 2014
Lawmaker uses Canadian case to criticize Obama
October 23, 2014
John McCain calls Navy 2-star an 'idiot' during interview
October 23, 2014
Kidnapping plot in Turkey raises new questions about U.S. troops' safety
October 23, 2014
The latest news from Flightlines
- Officer Training School graduates first total force class
- Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James to chat on Twitter
- Air Force Times Oct. 27 issue comic
The latest from PT365
- PT365 Run Plans | Marathon race tips: Run it like a hybrid car from Lt. Col. (Dr.) Mark Cucuzzella
- CrossFit vs. unit PT | Troops will do the training plans in whats likely the biggest CrossFit study ever
- GearScout | How to gear up for a stage race from a gear pro and 170-mile Grand to Grand finisher
Sign up now for free Military Times E-Reports. Choose from Money and Education. Subscribers: log in for premium e-newsletters.


text:
7:07, the iPhone is playing music from Kid Cudi… No way I'm getting up, I push "snooze". The same thing happens again 7 minutes later… After our hard training session yesterday, I could easily have slept another 2 hours. But I have to get up, the first training session starts in just 16 minutes.
At 7:30 I meet my brothers Andrea and Florin. Together we go for an easy morning jog… Sober, of course.
Later we indulge in a balanced breakfast and discuss how the day will proceed. Well, we unfortunately don't have a lot of choices. We have to keep in line with the specifications of our trainer Adrian Bürgi – but luckily the weather is cooperating today.
The great thing about top-class sports is that I can already take a well-deserved break at 9 a.m. and put up my feet for a while. Unfortunately not for very long, as our next training session is at ten.
9:55, 13 degrees Celsius outside - perfect for training on our bikes. We can finally get back outside and train on our BMC machines. We've really done enough roller training this winter.
9:57 - What should I wear?
10:01 - Our training partner Alain Wüthrich from TG Hütten arrives.
10:03 - We're ready to take off – but my brother still has a flat
10:07 - We finally start.
The schedule calls for 120 minutes of bike training – today we're truly a BMC team!! It looks great. After starting off easy, we do 2 x 20 minute team rides in a Belgian tourniquet. Unfortunately we have a few problems. Well, looks like we're going to have to practice a few more times.
Back home we do a quick transition and then continue on with a final combined run. It is very important in the triathlon that we also do a lot of training where we run after cycling. Today not everyone is in top form; the cold is taking its toll. But when we train as a "team" there isn't too much complaining. You just keep going… you don't have any other choice.
We take a coffee break and a short power nap after lunch… Today it unfortunately must be a really short nap because the Salvisberg brothers have to attend a lecture at 3:00 p.m. at the University of Bern. Today it's statistics…
2 hours later, and not much cleverer, we leave the university and now know that there are such things as covariance, correlation and standard deviation. Well... we're going to have to repeat this a bit at home in order to figure out what it was actually about.
This is directly followed by a swimming training session in Burgdorf. It was actually supposed to be easy… but unfortunately the swimmers' training schedule was completely different today. The training session includes 15 x 100 m, and fast. I approach the set relatively easily since the swimmers are in top form right before the Swiss Championship. All of a sudden, my younger brother Florin picks up speed and swims the 100 m in a similar time to the swimmers. As the older brother I obviously can't accept this and now swim after him… In the end we had a pretty tough swimming session. But what was I supposed to do? Even though my brothers are constantly getting faster, I still want to be the fastest in the family. We thus complete the circle and all of the Salvisberg brothers motivate each other. I am currently still the fastest in the family… but for how much longer??
At home we allow ourselves a quiet evening in front of the television, on Facebook or studying… this is left up to each of us… I don't even think about tomorrow's training… It will probably be hard once again.


text:
Minimal and elegantly irreverent, our Brass Fly Box is a twinkly chic way to stash your pocket change and loose bits. Pared down to its most essential elements, the box is first cast by hand then set in solid brass and decorated with iridescent otter shell details. The mix of materials and shimmering surface is like jewelry for your desktop. Every piece in our collection of brass bibelots is sand cast in solid brass then polished to perfection by hand. Like a fine wine or your favorite leather jacket, our brass only gets better with age. Over time, the polished brass will develop a rich natural patina. If desired, buff out fingerprints and surface scratches with a dollop of brass polish and a microfiber cloth. And here's a nifty designer's tip: if you have no patience for patina, drop your brass in a bucket of acetone (but only at your own risk).
• polished brass with otter shell details • 5.75" wide x 2" high x 4.5" deep
• This item ships via standard ground shipping.
or Call:
Mon–Fri 9:30am–6:30pm EST800.963.0891
Brass Objects from Jonathan Adler


text:
If your child loves to dress up for Halloween and other events, a kids wig is just what they need to complete their look! If your son or daughter has their eyes on a particularly intricate character, it can be a lot easier to pick out a child's wig than try to recreate the look from scratch. Other characters, like Rapunzel and Strawberry Shortcake, just have hard to create hairstyles. A wig for children can add length and color to your kid's costume.
Multi Colored Child's Clown Wig
Monster High Frankie Stein Wig Child
Biblical Wig and Beard Set Child
Strawberry Shortcake Childs Wig
Monster High Draculaura Wig Child
Girls Disney's Tangled Rapunzel Wig
Kids' Monster High Skelita Calaveras Costume Wig
Monster High Clawdeen Wolf Wig Child
Kids wigs are the perfect size for smaller heads, and most are designed to match popular children's characters. You can recreate a Monster High costume with wigs for kid's characters like Frankie Stein, Draculaura, Clawdeen Wolf, and Cleo DeNile. Other character wigs we offer include Rapunzel, Smurfette, Alice in Wonderland, Merida, Dorothy from the wizard of Oz, and pop stars like Katy Perry. You don't have to have a certain character in mind to make use of our kid wigs. A generic wig design can add some fun to an Indian, princess, superhero, or historic look. Natural color wigs are also great for decade outfits. Add a kids wig to 70s braids or disco afro ensembles.


text:
May we also suggest the following gifts...
Customer Reviews
Average Ratings:
Write your own review
Rate this product:
"Crystal Ornament"
By Anita McChesney
Comments: I ordered this ornament for my sister and brother-in-law's 50th Wedding Anniversary. I was notified that it was shipped the day after I order it. They have received it and think it is absolutely beautiful. Thank you.
"Beautiful ornament!"
By Tonya McDonald
Comments: Gave ornament to my parents for their 50th anniversary. Loved it! Heavier than expected. Nice! Packaged well. Highly recommend to others. Will be a return customer in the future. A special thanks to Jenny in Customer Service for all her help!
"Very nice"
By Gina Baker
Comments: This is a lovely ornament packaged beautifully. It arrived earlier than expected. It would be nice, since it's an ornament, that it come with some sort of thread to hang it by. Otherwise, no complaints.
"5th Anniversary Ornament"
By Sue Daughety
Comments: Ordered this for my sister and her husband. They loved it!! It's a gorgeous Christmas ornament, they can remember it every year! Thanks so much for such a precious gift for my sister!!
"Classy gift"
By Irene Freder
Comments: I was impressed by the beauty of this ornament. It will be the perfect gift! And I will be thought of EVERY year as they dress their tree.
>> Read all Customer reviews [] |
Write your own review


text:
INGLEWOOD, Calif. (April 15, 2011)—The first Vegas Gold Handicapping contest will take place Sunday, April 24 – opening weekend of the Spring/Summer meet at Hollywood Park.
The "real money'' contest will continue every Sunday throughout the season, which concludes July 17.
The fee to participate is $70 – $20 to enter and a $50 live money bankroll to make contest card wagers. All contestants must wager exactly $5 Win and place ($10 total) on one horse in any five live races at Hollywood Park. The player with the largest bankroll after the final Hollywood Park race is official is the winner.
There is a $1,000 weekly prize for the highest final bankroll, $500 for second highest and $250 to the third highest bankroll. Each of the top five finishers weekly qualify for the final round July 17.
The top finisher in the final round will receive an entry in the 2012 Daily Racing Form/National Thoroughbred Racing Association National Handicapping Championship in Las Vegas. The grand prize also includes travel and hotel accommodations.
Those interested can enter at the Contest Central booth on the second floor of the grandstand across from the main customer service booth. For complete rules and information, visit any customer service booth or go on-line at www.hollywoodpark.com.
Copyright © 2009-2014, Hollywood Park. All rights reserved.


text:
|Date & Location
|Don Williams
|Wednesday, November 5, 2014 at 8:00 PM
Paramount Theatre - Austin, TX
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 7:30 PM
HEB Performance Hall At Tobin Center for the Performing Arts
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 8:00 PM
Wagner Noel Performing Arts Center
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Wednesday, November 12, 2014 at 7:30 PM
Abilene Civic Center
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Thursday, November 13, 2014 at 8:00 PM
Stafford Centre
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Friday, November 14, 2014 at 8:00 PM
Brady Theater
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Saturday, November 15, 2014 at 7:00 PM
Choctaw Casino & Resort - Durant
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Wednesday, January 7, 2015 at 7:30 PM
Florida Theatre Jacksonville
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 8:00 PM
Sunrise Theatre - FL
|View Tickets
|Don Williams
|Friday, January 9, 2015 at 8:00 PM
Parker Playhouse
|View Tickets
|Don Williams Austin - Paramount Theatre - Austin, TX
Don Williams Tulsa - Brady Theater
Don Williams Durant - Choctaw Casino & Resort - Durant
Don Williams Stafford - Stafford Centre
Don Williams Abilene - Abilene Civic Center
Don Williams Midland - Wagner Noel Performing Arts Center
Don Williams Arlington - Arlington Music Hall
Don Williams Lakeland - Youkey Theatre - Lakeland Center
Don Williams San Antonio - HEB Performance Hall At Tobin Center For The Performing Arts
Don Williams Palm Desert - Mccallum Theatre
Don Williams Concert Tickets
For a country music fan, there's nothing like Don Williams tickets. Treat yourself to a live concert today. The folk music stylings of Don Williams will have you singing right along. Plus, all of our concert tickets are guaranteed, and are usually 10 to 20 percent cheaper than the competition.
|Pink Tickets
The Eagles Tickets
John Mayer Tickets
Phillip Phillips Tickets
Bruno Mars Tickets
Taylor Swift Tickets
Country Megaticket Tickets
Maroon 5 Tickets
Ellie Goulding Tickets
Fleetwood Mac Tickets
Kelly Clarkson Tickets
Luke Bryan Tickets
Florida Georgia Line Tickets
Thompson Square Tickets
Pitbull Tickets
Dave Matthews Band Tickets
Kenny Chesney Tickets
Kacey Musgraves Tickets
Miranda Lambert Tickets
Eli Young Band Tickets
|Justin Bieber Tickets
Bon Jovi Tickets
Jason Aldean Tickets
Phish Tickets
Bob Seger Tickets
Little Big Town Tickets
Rihanna Tickets
Mumford And Sons Tickets
Dustin Lynch Tickets
Keith Urban Tickets
T.I. Tickets
Depeche Mode Tickets
Matchbox Twenty Tickets
Jimmy Buffett Tickets
Romeo Santos Tickets
Eric Church Tickets
Rascal Flatts Tickets
Brantley Gilbert Tickets
Tim McGraw Tickets
Love And Theft Tickets
|Your tickets will arrive before the event.
|Your tickets will be the ones you ordered, or better seats than you paid for.
|Our confidence in the sellers that list tickets on our exchange allows us to offer you this guarantee.