DPR Review D850

ISOhappy

Senior Member
Pretty solid review. I like they posted full-size example shots. A lot of review sites will only post tiny samples that make it impossible to judge IQ. TBH, I'm not super impressed with noise as ISO creeps up. It seems very good, but not much different than top DX cameras, like the D500. I would've liked if they included an ISO testing section where they compared it to other cameras. DPR does have the studio review scene, but it's hard to compare FX to DX with that because it's an ideal shot, where they can fill the frame with both cameras. In real life, I usually can't fill the frame, which is why I use DX.
 

lokatz

Senior Member
In real life, I usually can't fill the frame, which is why I use DX.

For myself, I can state with confidence (and I am nearly certain that the same is true for almost all members of this forum) that I am able to fill the frame with most of my shooting, FX or DX, if I so desire. Maybe you need to get closer to your subject or get a longer lens. It is a weird criterion for a camera to assume you're not going to use much of its sensor area anyway.

On a side note, as I am sure you know, FX has an intrinsic advantage over DX with regards to noise because of its much larger sensor size. The D850, with its very high resolution, may be more challenged than other FX bodies here, but if you do the math, the 45.4MP on the 864mm2 of the D850 result in a theoretical pixel size of 19.03um2 (ignoring gaps between pixels), whereas the 370mm2 and 20.9MP of the D500 give you 17.7um2 or about 7 percent smaller pixels. (For FX bodies with lower pixel count, the comparison becomes almost unfair.) I love my DX bodies as much as anybody, but for their crop and resulting reach, not for best noise performance.

Unless Nikon screwed up somewhere, the D850 should perform slightly better with regards to noise than the D500. Since there are a number of variables that make comparative testing difficult, temperature being the most important one, I'll wait for a side-by-side test before drawing conclusions.
 

ISOhappy

Senior Member
For myself, I can state with confidence (and I am nearly certain that the same is true for almost all members of this forum) that I am able to fill the frame with most of my shooting, FX or DX, if I so desire. Maybe you need to get closer to your subject or get a longer lens. It is a weird criterion for a camera to assume you're not going to use much of its sensor area anyway.

On a side note, as I am sure you know, FX has an intrinsic advantage over DX with regards to noise because of its much larger sensor size. The D850, with its very high resolution, may be more challenged than other FX bodies here, but if you do the math, the 45.4MP on the 864mm2 of the D850 result in a theoretical pixel size of 19.03um2 (ignoring gaps between pixels), whereas the 370mm2 and 20.9MP of the D500 give you 17.7um2 or about 7 percent smaller pixels. (For FX bodies with lower pixel count, the comparison becomes almost unfair.) I love my DX bodies as much as anybody, but for their crop and resulting reach, not for best noise performance.

Unless Nikon screwed up somewhere, the D850 should perform slightly better with regards to noise than the D500. Since there are a number of variables that make comparative testing difficult, temperature being the most important one, I'll wait for a side-by-side test before drawing conclusions.

Not sure what everyone here is typically shooting, but I enjoy wildlife and nature subjects. For large animals like deer, I could maybe get by with just FX, but try filling the FX frame with a bird. Try getting closer to a lion or a bear. I've never heard any wildlife shooter complain about having too much reach.

In general, FX cameras usually have much larger pixels than DX, but in this case, the size of the 850's photosites is nearly the same as the 500's, hence nearly the same performance. I'm still waiting for reviews to come in, but Steve Perry is planning on comparing the D850 to the D500 in his upcoming review. It should be interesting.

This is from the DP Review studio scene, so take that for what it's worth, but before downsizing the 850 image, it has worse noise than the DX camera. And this is not really a fair test for the D500 because they filled the frame with the FX shot. Again, my focus is on wildlife, so in all likelihood, I wouldn't be able to fill the FX frame, so the noise on the 850 shot would be worse, since I'd have to crop it down to DX size.

MyPicture1.jpeg

I know, my views are a bit skewed since I'm only looking at this camera from a wildlife shooter's perspective. I agree, as an all-arounder, it should be pretty good.
 

lokatz

Senior Member
I know, my views are a bit skewed since I'm only looking at this camera from a wildlife shooter's perspective. I agree, as an all-arounder, it should be pretty good.

I'm looking at it from a wildlife shooter's perspective, too. The below were all shot in the wild, and while some of them received some cropping, it was not enough in any of these cases to lose a D850's advantage over a D500. Yes, I shoot faraway birds, too, and I agree that DX has an advantage there. As I said in a different thread, though, your idea of wildlife strikes me more as "birds-and-large-animals-from-far-away".

Wildlife shooting is more than that, and a lot of it benefits from higher resolution.


EDIT: Maybe I should note that the longest lens used for any of these was 300mm.

Wildlife.jpg
 
Last edited:

ISOhappy

Senior Member
Whatever works for you :cool: I actually had the D850 on preorder, but decided to cancel due to several factors. I thought about how much I crop, and it happens a lot on DX, so there's no point in switching. Cropping decreases quality, so I'd rather have a full-frame DX shot than a half-frame FX shot. Also, I don't think most people really need 45 MP, but to each their own.

Here is just one quick example from back when I had my D7200. I had to crop a ton, and that's on DX. This bird was on the other side of a swamp, up in a tree, so there's no way I could've gotten any closer before he flew away.

1.jpgScreencap1.jpg
 
Top