Maybe i should have stated a smaller sensor than the D7200
Nikon D500 Announced
- Thread starter mauckcg
- Start date
Danno_RIP
Senior Member
Just watched the video and saw that it is just as exposed as the D750. I don't get how Nikon can can call this pro & weather sealed if a drop of water on the ribbon cable can cause damage (unless the manual for it says differently). A lot of people, myself included, tote their bodies around with the lens facing downward, which fully exposes the LCD (and all the ingress points around the LCD) to moisture from above. If I wanted DX, I'd still get the D500, but I would not trust it in even the lightest of rain. I've been shooting the D750 in rainy conditions, albeit only when using a protective rain cover-so far, I've managed to keep the thing dry, but I sure wish I could rely on the camera's sealing and shoot without a cover. I realize I must be in the minority, as I simply never run across anyone mentioning this flaw on the D750 & I would imagine nobody will bring it up with the D500 either.
Theraphosa
Senior Member
I'm taking a work trip to Africa this Fall, and was going to us that as an excuse to upgrade from my D5200 to a D610 for wildlife photography over there.
With long lenses, high shutter speeds and narrow apertures I was looking for better ISO performance.
Would the D610 still be the better choice, do you think? I'm thinking that I might be able to save enough in lenses (DX over FX) in the long run, to make the higher pricepoint worth it. But will the ISO performance of the D500 be that in the ballpark of the D610?
With long lenses, high shutter speeds and narrow apertures I was looking for better ISO performance.
Would the D610 still be the better choice, do you think? I'm thinking that I might be able to save enough in lenses (DX over FX) in the long run, to make the higher pricepoint worth it. But will the ISO performance of the D500 be that in the ballpark of the D610?
Would you envisage having to crop the D610,if yes then the D500 stands a good chance of being better,even the D7200 does against cropping a D610.
Difficult to confirm, the first person posted a review and states very clean performance in the native ISO range: 100-51200
Compare to a D610 native ISO 100 to 6400.
Somehow you could expect from specs recoverable shots at 12800 ISO with the D500, probably quite high keeper rate at 25600 ISO, however this needs to be confirmed in practice (Specs are higher then a D4s??). This does not mean that the shot would have the same colour depth and dynamic range as an FX, but also here Nikon claims to be confident with the D500.
I think that is the new thing now. I don't remember if Canon or Sony came out with it first a year or two back the A7 or 5DS.
I tend to disagree. For the hobbyist DX with D500 performance will probably be unbeatable for sports and wildlife at this time.
For professional Nikon sports and wildlife photographers, they will go D5. The little advantage in ISO, FPS and probably tracking, the higher life, better sealing of the body, better colour depth and dynamic range are more important then getting closer to the subject through field of view. The professional will work a lot in twilight, avoiding hard eye shadows, needing that FX extra touch; they take the time and the preparation to get physically close to the subject, on top of that they generally have better tele lenses. .
So yes there will be a lot of D500 bodies sold and correctly so. For many daytime/less critical shooters a D7X00/D5X00 will be more then sufficient already. For some the D5 will be the status symbol (I can only do with the best) or the edge they (think they) need in their business. Many professionals will still be shooting a D4 FX and getting better pictures then D500 DX owners.
RocketCowboy
Senior Member
I'm a big fan of the D610 personally (I like it better than the D750 for me), but when you combine "long lenses" and "wildlife" in the same statement my first thought is DX body.
The D610 is certainly cheaper than the D500 at this point, so while the D500 is improving in the low light capabilities over previous DX bodies, the D610 can be had for less. But ... if you're needing the reach of a DX sensor combined with long lenses, you might prefer the D500 more than cropping the same images off the D610.
I would contemplate whether a single trip to Africa is enough to justify a new camera purchase (vs renting a more appropriate body if needed), and look at what suits the rest of your shooting needs before deciding on that one. Then again, I tend to over-analyze and then make impulsive purchase decisions anyway, so I may not be the best advise guy.
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
So I'm NOT the only one!
TL Robinson
Senior Member
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
Do you mean in terms of MP's? That's actually quite typical in the Pro series cameras. 20MP's vs. 24MP's means you're losing 10% in image size, but the gains in IQ are more than made up for in the "loss". Larger pixel sizes are going to help tremendously with reducing noise (which to @RocketCowboy's point below means that I expect the D500 to easily rival the D600/610 in ISO noise capabilities) as well as light information (bigger pixel = more light). 20MP's is more than enough for just about anything you're going to do with prints (16x20 requires a minimum of 8MP's) and beyond what you'll need for posting on the internet. Heck, the D4s is 16MPs and I don't remember anyone ever saying they couldn't blow up those images as big as they need them. I think we get way too hung up on MP's, myself included.
donaldjledet
Senior Member
Agree people get to hung up on
Pixels count just for every day shooting.
Sent from my Z987 using Tapatalk
Pixels count just for every day shooting.
Sent from my Z987 using Tapatalk
Michael J.
Senior Member
Honestly, at the moment I don't see how the D500 helps me hobby photographer to get better photos which I never sell to get the investment back. For Facebook, twitter, etc. the D7000 does a great job. My family likes my photos as they look at them.
People get crazy about the D500 cos they wanted/waited so long the D400 to be announced. Now they glorify the D500 and the price goes up. Nikon did a great job, let ppl wait for such a long of the D400 so they will take the D500 for sure for almost any price they put on.
People get crazy about the D500 cos they wanted/waited so long the D400 to be announced. Now they glorify the D500 and the price goes up. Nikon did a great job, let ppl wait for such a long of the D400 so they will take the D500 for sure for almost any price they put on.
Osantacruz
Senior Member
Why does making money back for your investment matter? Do hobby musicians not buy better instruments as they get better just for their own enjoyment? Do people with other hobbies not buy new stuff because it's not making them better at their hobby or making them money? People like new gear and features. If you're happy with what you got, good for you I guess. But to act so upset about a new camera that actually sounds like it's not crippled to be very different from the bigger, flagship version seems silly. I could probably keep taking photos with my original d50 and say I'm not making money so why upgrade?
Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk
salukfan111
Senior Member
The difference is this may clean the D750s clock in low light performance and let you keep a crop factor camera. The myths surrounding DX and FF may be coming to an end.But what are the advantages of its 20.9 mp sensor in comparison to the 24.2 mp sensor of the D7200? I'm technologically challenged when it comes to this kind of stuff!
salukfan111
Senior Member
It'd be cheaper if it didn't have that crap nobody wants on it.