D5 -- What will it take to make you upgrade from a D3s, D4, or D4s to a D5?

spraynpray

"I'd forget Nikon's now obsolete D5, which was rendered obsolete by this 1DX Mk II even before the D5 shipped." Ken Rockwell Guess we all can stop lusting after an obsolete camera! LOL

He does make it quite hard not to dislike him. He is just another of the internet idiots, but being that with such childish enthusiasm and competence actually gets to me. It has the opposite effect to what he doubtless aims for though.

As I see and hear it, the Canon owners are pretty disgusted with the Canon offering.

donaldejose

spraynpray: What do Cannon owners dislike about the 1DX Mark II? I would have thought the ability to shoot through flicker would be an attraction to sports shooters and they would be disappointed that the D5 does not have this feature.

spraynpray

The AF and the ISO performance Donald. I agree the D5 should have flicker reduction though.

donaldejose

Yes, I expect the D5 to have better high ISO performance, better AF and better dynamic range. Maybe flicker reduction can be added with a software update? I don't know how it works so I don't know if any hardware is needed.

WestEndFoto

Yes, I expect the D5 to have better high ISO performance, better AF and better dynamic range. Maybe flicker reduction can be added with a software update? I don't know how it works so I don't know if any hardware is needed.

It will be a natural upgrade with the D5s once all the D500 beta testors work out the bugs.

donaldejose

Yes, I would expect it in the D5s but the D5 if for sports shooters and surely they would want to have this feature in the D5.

Ironheart

They are probably having fun getting it to be reliable at 12fps. The D500 "only" has to do 10fps.

WestEndFoto

It is quite an achievement to autofocus at 12 or 14 fps. I wonder if anyone is cheating and taking more than one shot in the mirror cycle?

Ironheart

Not yet. They would have to make that configurable. Since locking focus only adds 2fps you have to presume it wouldn't buy you much.

NSXTypeR

There's not much that could convince me to get a D5, unless someone gave me a D5, I would personally never buy one.

I think the most expensive DSLR I'd get would be the D810 if at all. I'd need to buy a new laptop and memory cards at the very least too.

DenverShooter

The D500 shoots through the flickering of indoor lights while the D5 lacks this feature, that's why it will be better for most indoor sports arenas. Generally, you are using mild telephoto for indoor sports, not wide angle so the relative lack of DX wide angle lenses isn't a limitation. A key issue will be whether or not a D500 can shoot cleanly at ISO 6,400 to 12,800. If so, you will be able to stop motion with an f2.8 lens. If you don't have to deal with flickering lights, the D5 would be better because it should be about one stop cleaner at high ISO.

Virtually all indoor sporting venues use three phase lighting (to eliminate motion strobing). There isn't any "flicker" per say with three phase lighting. Now you can get some lighting color temp changes with some types of discharge lamps as they ramp up and down during the power cycle, but I haven't run into it...

Watch NHL hockey, basket ball or Poodles on Ice (figure skating) on HDTV and you don't see any issues...

Denver Shooter

donaldejose

The term "flicker" may be imprecise. Here is what Nikon says in their D500 brochure:

"Artificial light sources such as fluorescent lighting tend to produce flickering, leaving some of your images dark. To avoid this effect, the D500 offers a flicker reduction function for still images as well as for movies. The camera detects the peak brightness
level and automatically shifts the release timing slightly to avoid underexposure, giving you stable exposures even when using continuous shooting*. In movie shooting, use “Auto” flicker reduction, and the camera automatically detects 50 Hz or 60 Hz light, preventing the occurrence of banding in footage." page 44.

WestEndFoto

I noticed the flickering the other night on my D800. About a third the images were dark in the background (I was using flash on the subject). The lighting was fluorescent.

It did not bother me much, as I was taking lots of shots. However, I can see how it would be quite annoying to have the "perfect shot" less than perfect.

FreezeAction

I can't upgrade from the afore named bodies. I don't own one. I'd accept a gift of a D5 and might buy a back up D5 if the gifted body lived up to expectations with professional quality glass. I would not expect it to live up to the best IQ with prosumer glass.

Msmoto

D5.....for me, the D5 is not an option at all as I think the D500 can do virtually everything I want in action photos, while using one of the high pixel bodies for static/landscape/etc. images.

Winning the lotto could change anything, however...... ;;)

WestEndFoto

I find the latest blog about it the D5's low light performance interesting. Nikon seems to have teased out low light performance but given up low ISO performance in exchange. I wonder if this will be a strategy they employ across the range, or only with selected cameras or even only the D5.

donaldejose

Careful, I question whether that loss of dynamic range as low ISO is even a true finding. Better wait for more proof it exists before even talking about it.

WestEndFoto

Agreed.

autofocus

Looking at Joe McNally's blog I believe it will perform just fine. Looking forward to the arrival.

heartyfisher

" Nikon seems to have teased out low light performance but given up low ISO performance in exchange" Noticed that as well ... not that it matters much for the types of images the D5 is expected to excel at. and not that the Low ISO DR is crap! not sure if its "teased out".. its a pretty major jump in High ISO performance. given the increase in MP as well.

Nice to see my D7200 DR out performs these FX sensors (F4/D5/Df) in Low ISO which is what I shoot at 90% of the time .. :-)

PS: Had a closer look at the D7200 vs a few other Nikon sensors. Its the best of the nikon DX sensors, almost as good as the D800/810 and behind the 610 .. interesting to note that it is nicely ahead of these FX sensor if they are put in DX mode... No wonder its become my primary shooter.. just on gut feel. As I shoot mostly at base ISO.
Now I am worried about the D500... If the D500 is similar to the D5, the D7200 sensor is likely to perform a lot better for my style of shooting !

donaldejose

heartyfisher: Thom Hogan notes today "Moreover, the D500 specs seem to indicate that it’s significantly better than a D7200, which would be a real surprise, because the D7200 is in a class by itself, within a half stop of 24mp FX sensors." A 24mp DX sensor withing a half stop of a 24mp FX sensor? That is very impressive indeed!

heartyfisher

Yeah of course we are comparing with Nikon FX sensors. D7200 of course blows away any of the Canon ones ;-) but they will never know :-)