New Member here! - Looking at D500

Hello, fellow Nikon users.

I held an N90s for a number of years, and moved to the D90 to go digital. This was about 10 years ago, keeping my FX lenses from the N90s. The D90 has been fine, and I consider keeping it as a back-up body.

I am currently eyeing the D500 (and will have one for rent in a couple of days for a shoot next weekend, with the newest 18-300mm lens to demo as well). I shoot a number of auto races, and the speed of the D500 is my curiosity point. I would not be able to go for an XQD card anytime soon, and if I get the D500, probably a little wait until UHS-II; I have some fast (for their design) UHS-I cards already,and would test with those.

The D90, while a fine camera limits me in rapid fire with RAW enabled to where the buffer must write to the card when only a minimal number of shots have been fired. Therefore, I've been shooting it strictly JPG, and can get reasonable rapid fire...but I am very curious how the D500 will perform in the same state. I could use 2 SD cards (both UHS-I for initial tests), one for RAW, the other JPG, if that will be beneficial.

Been shooting since I was a kid, starting with a Minolta SRT-101, then the trusty tank of Canon F1 (which I still have; not using now, but do not want to let it go...many trips with it! It remains in perfect shape, albeit with some brassing)

Anyhow, hello....I will post more after the D500 demo; and can post pix as requested.

Thanks, all.

Welcome! Quite a few shooter here with D500's you should be able to get some feed back.

The only thing better than the D500 is two D500's. Welcome:encouragement:

Welcome.

Yeah, XQD cards are expensive. The good news is that you can still get a pretty good number of shots off with a fast SD card before you hit the buffer.

I'm not sure that the 18-300 will show you all that the D500 is capable of. I had the earlier version of the 18-300 and it was pretty unsharp at most focal distances. I'll be interested to see what you think.

The D500 is a really great performer. Fast, accurate autofocus with focus points all over the screen. 10 fps is great for any kind of action. I'm betting you'll love it.

Anyway, welcome and have fun trying out the D500.

Welcome aboard. Enjoy the ride.
We look forward to seeing more posts and samples of your work.

For strictly action photography, the D500 is hard to beat.

I have the D500 and love it.
Fast action is one of the scenarios it will excel.
I can't comment on hitting the buffer without the XQD card, never tried that.
My settings are: RAW (14 bit uncompressed) to the XQD, JPEG (finest setting) to the SD card and have never had any issues with limitations due to buffer.

Have fun shooting with the D500, you'll love it.

The D500is quite a camera as you will discover but don't judge it for focus speed or resolution with the 18-300 which is a general purpose travel entry level lens that will not show the real capability.
I still have a D90 and don't use it often but loved it as my first DSLR after shooting Canon A1 film for decades. The12mpx sensor is really quite good and sort of the sweet spot in a balance between resolution and display capability, and effective use of memory. Even now, 10 years later some shots taken with that camera are my most requested prints. It might be because being reasonable in size even with the grip, and low weight, it went everywhere with me, had almost every time I left my home. It has over 200,000 shutter clicks and still works the same as new.
Everything the D90 did so well compared to the competition, the D500 does times 5. I don't have one but have used one a lot and think it is about the best general purpose and action specialty crop camera ever made and the other brands are not even trying to compete. One of its superior traits besides all the speed and AF is the JPG rendering engine retains color accuracy deep into the lowest light levels like nothing before it. It is not that much lower noise than other current cameras at high ISO but the quality of the JPG is generates is really something to experience. In that regard my D800 or the D810, both great cameras with excellent DR start to color shift in very low light as high ISO. The D500 doesn't. 25,000iso shots in very dim light might be noisy but the color is preserved so a little Dfine 2 noise reduction software processing and you have a printable image.
If possible, rent a 70-200 2.8 for the races or 300 f/4. You will be glad you did.
Good luck and congratulations for choosing the best camera for your craft

Yeah, the more I read, the more 2 lenses are a better bet for me, I think. I will test the 18-300mm as a rental, but there's deals now including the D500 body with grip and 16-80mm lens (that lens seems to spec quite well on its own). Add to that a good 70-300mm, and I'm covering the lengths I'd like.

BTW...the SD cards I have now are UHS-I series, I'll want to see how fast they write (ultimately would like to write RAW and JPG; the D90 is too slow if I keep RAW, so for the races it's strictly JPG). Think a I series would do? I'd get at least some UHS-II down the line before ever considering the XQD types.

I have the D500 and heartily recommend it. Some complain it does not have a pop up flash - not a deal breaker in my view. Pop ups are only good in a pinch - when pinched with a D500 just crank up the ISO it can manage.

I do concur with Woody, that 18-300 is a bit of a miss match with the D500. But it will show you want it can do even when paired with inexpensive slower lens. It really shines best when paired with some better glass. I have a Siggy 18-250 and did select that one for a recent trip when I wanted the benefits of a superzoom. Did a great job.

Renting it will let you get the feel for the camera. I had a D90 too and if you liked your D90 you will love the D500.

When you rent the D500, also rent the 70-200 f/2.8.
It is my most used combo and delivers stunning results.

I recommend taking more time to think of glass. The D500, 850 and D750 deserve good lenses to get the value out of the combination. The 16-80 2.8-4.0 is pretty good but still a compromise if you have something specific you are shooting. For example, if you are shooting people, head and shoulders, an 85 1.8G will run circles around the zoom, is lighter and cheaper.
The 70-300 is a fine general purpose slow moderately long consumer zoom for those without a specialty in mind. You have a specialty in mind that does not fit well in the qualities of the 70-300. You need fast focusing and good subject isolation and few zooms compare to the 70-200 2.8G or E in quality out of focus rendering, light gathering, and coatings(a major advantage in shooting cars with sun reflections off shiny parts. There are good primes that are cheaper if you know what FL is optimum.
For DX you can get the older 70-200 2.8 VR which has more corner darkness wide open than the newer versions but used this workhorse is the best bang for the buck on DX and still very good on Fx, for $900 is a pretty impressive lens and can be your sports and portraiture. A used pro type lens will give a longer life of high performance than a new plastic.
Another consideration is good glass is the offerings from the ever-improving 3rd party lens makers: Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina. The Optics of the ART series lenses from Sigma get top ratings but they are generally in the same price range of new Nikon lenses. The TAMRON SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 is 3 key points: it is sharper, better Bokeh and $1500 cheaper than the Nikon 70-200 VRIII. A bargain at $1300 and the 24-70 2.8 G2 is $600 less than the Nikon and is getting top ratings also. For used, a 17-55 2.8 Nikon is a DX with true pro quality and a good value used for $500 is a better lens on DX than any other zoom in that range. Pro all metal lenses keep their value because they do not wear out. All these mentions are significantly better than the 16-80 and 70-300 for what you do.

Good comments, thanks; I'll take all into consideration.

And after some more research, I have found some 17-55mm for sale, though some above $500 (B&H for example is showing it more like $900, and KEH for $730, $550 in their "BGN" condition); still the recommendations of this lens are well worth considering. Certainly I should look on classifieds here on the board; for such pricey items I am gun shy of eBay. I have always had good experiences with KEH (and for new, B&H).

While working the D90, I have frequently gone to 300mm on the older 70-300mm ED 4-5.6 FX lens I originally bought for the N90s. The recommendation of 70-200mm shows a quality optic and speed, but I am not sure of the reach for what I've been doing, and of course, the budget I can place on this at present. Hence I was considering a newer lens in that range, but not something that sets me back $2K at this time. I could test my present 300mm on the rental body; if it works well, stick with that until a later time when I could invest more.

I am inclined to zero in on the 17-55; I read some reviews on the 16-80 where at least one photographer felt it was slow to focus, and a disappointment when comapred to a 17-55.

Thanks again for all your comments and suggestions; please feel free to add as needed The rental D500 will be with me tomorrow evening.

The 17-55 2.8 can be had on eBay or locally for $500-600, since the market B&H or KEH is not added. eBay does have guarantees if you have been sent an item that is not as described they will cancel the order and refund your money. I got a number of things on eBay in the past and always the item was better than described because the sellers rely on their customer ratings for your livelihood and a bad review really impacts their future earnings.
I got my 70-200 from someone who bought it new and never used it because it was too heavy. He was a 20 year old who bought his first camera and $5k in lenses after getting a small windfall and decided he did not like DSLR and bought a compact camera to replace the new D300. So I lucked out and saved $600. That was the first lens I bought after getting the D90 and started collecting lenses. I got a 17-55 used but hardly use it since I bought a new 24-70 2.8 from B&H, a better range for my shooting for portraiture. The 70-200 is still one of my most used lenses for everything where 70 is not too long. In events I usually use 2 cameras, a 70-200 mounted on a crop D7000 and a wider lens, usually 24-70 or 14-24 or 24 1.4 on the D800 depending on the venue. IF you have specific focal lengths you are interested in, for example 180, a used 180 2.8 is reasonable, lighter than a 70-200 zoom and has excellent image quality, better than a zoom for about 1/2 the price, it you can get by with shorter telephoto like 85, the 85 1.8G is fantastic, light and faster focusing then its heavier cousin the 85 1.4. Many reviews rank it better than the also great 85 1.4 at 1/3 the price. A 50 1.8G is also a seriously good lens for $250 new. For wider on crop there are very ultra wides, like the Nikon or Sigma 10-20 that are bargains, or the 11-16 Tokina that is a fast lens with excellent optics. Primes are plentiful in the used market because so many have been made for film over the years. I think for you, a priority would be the 70-200 because it is perfect for what you shoot and even a kit zoom has decent image quality in the mid range. 200 mm on a crop camera is the same field of view as 300 on a film or full frame and remember, with 20.6mpx you have more options for cropping. Image quality can still be great with a 50% or more crop. I have wall mounted prints from my D800 that were small details of the overall image. It is 36mpx but at 20.6 you actually have more pixel density on a crop sensor than my D800 full frame so you will be surprised how much you can crop. 200mm on a D500 is a pretty darn versatile focal length. It might be too short on fullframe for auto racing however.
Good luck, you are going to love that combo and be the envy of all the other shooters who have no D500 or fast glass. For those shoots where 200 is not long enough, say for birds in flight, rent a 400 2.8 or 200-500 and a sturdy tripod and gimbal mount, but otherwise 200 mm on a crop sensor is really good for most sports unless you are too far away, than hand held with any lens might not be good.

Well, it's here, the rental, that is. I've test fired it in the house. I spent the past few days going over the manual so nothing would be too surprising. A lot like the D90 in controls and settings, so I'm pretty familiar with it right from the start.

I'm impressed on the speed. I burst fired high speed, strictly JPG, then RAW, then JPG + RAW. Looks like it wil be no problem to shoot both JPG + RAW at the car races; the buffer holds enough, even on my UHS-I SD cards (all I have). I'd go UHS-II down the line; probably be a while to consider XQD as I get all the costs covered for this, once I pull the trigger and purchase.

I'm eyeing a few 17-55mm lenses at the moment; acceptable prices for good quality used lenses. Yeah, I find KEH charges sales tax to CA, not sure why, but on a high ticket item, that can add up fast.

A little more testing with it tomorrow, then Thursday it is literally off to the races. The D90 will come along, of course, as a back-up; and I carry the Lumix on my belt, too.

I appreciate all the comments and tips thus far. Thank you!

I've had lots of Nikons but the D90 stays with me forever.

Welcome to the forum. I hope your testing goes well. One added comment... If you look at a 70-200 you might consider the Tamron f 2.8 G2. It is a very good lens at 1/2 the price of the Nikon. I do love mine and I use it a lot on my D700

The weekend at the racetrack was fun. The D500 is infinitely faster than my D90, indeed. I'm going through shots now; I'd be happy to post a couple when I have them prepped.

Nikon currently offering the D500 with the grip, too. I like a grip on my D90; the D500's priced at something like $370, but thrown into the mix for the price of the body right now. I'll let you know what I end up with, but thanks for the tips and suggestions; it was not one of the main lenses you recommended that I had on the rental, but it gave me a big feel for the D500...

Starting to get through my shots via Lightroom. Always a learning curve to make something worthy. Anyway, this is one of my first sessions with the D500; bikes at lunchtime exhibition.