D500 General Discussion Thread

Paperman

Guys, I am talking about a 79/200 RAW buffer that is in D500 specs .... I know how cards works/how faster cards help after buffer fills.

At 14 bits lossless compressed ( which should be enough for a sports action shot ) , that is 20 seconds continuous. I have never ever in my whole life shot or felt the need to shoot 20 seconds continuous ( nor 4 times back to back of 5 second bursts )

Just a reminder that 6-7 of those 20 second 10 fps bursts will probably fill in a 32GB card, 12-14 of them a 64GB.

Anyone dreaming of continuous shooting after running out of buffer must have a ton of ultra high speed cards with. At a couple or few hundred dollars each, we are talking about an investment the price of maybe half the D500.

Just saying one can make a normal speed $20-30 card work with minor limitations with such a buffer ( provided the 200 figure is correct )

spraynpray

Yep. Keep it real!

Michael

Sorry to be fixated on buffer depth and write speeds, but mathematics keeps some of my neurones from degenerating. :-)

I generally skip over written Japanese since I have such a low reading level, however, I went over the video again more carefully and noticed that it is embarrassingly obvious that they were using 14-bit uncompressed NEFs, and that they even stated the average size of the files! (Averaging 41.5 MB for those who are interested.)

Based on this newly understood information and some estimates of the timing of events, I made two write speed estimates for that Lexar UHS-II card claiming up to 260 MB/s write speeds.

My first estimate is based on the observation that it took 6.6 seconds to write the RAM to card, after buffer saturation had occurred and shooting had stopped. Thus, r29 indicates 29 NEFs had to be written, at 41.5 MB each, suggesting an actual write speed of 182 MB/s (4.4 fps with 14-bit uncompressed NEFs) or 70% of the claimed "up to" figure. I estimate that will translate into writing 6.7 14-bit lossless frames per second. If correct, and if the same write speed occurs during shooting, we should be able shoot at the maximum burst rate for at least 8 seconds when using 14-bit lossless NEFs and this card. However, note that these calculations are based on data from when the camera was not taking additional pictures....

For my second estimate I tried to work up a mathematical model of the first four seconds of the test while shooting is in progress (which led to noticing that the camera slowed down a bit after 3 seconds even though the buffer was not yet saturated). In the end, I ended up with an estimated write speed of 100 MB/s during shooting. That is equivalent to about 3.7 fps of 14-bit lossless NEFs (or 2.4 fps of 14-bit uncompressed NEFs). Thus the write speed during shooting may be quite different than after shooting. (Last night I lost sleep over the possibility fiziks pointed out "that the SD writer in the camera may be the limiting factor"). Tonight I'll lose sleep over the potential lower write speed during shooting.

FYI: With an effective write speed of 3.7 fps during shooting with 14-bit lossless compressed files, the buffer would be about:
CH: 39 frames (4.0 seconds)
9 fps: 50 frames (5.6 seconds)
8 fps: 53 frames (6.6 seconds)
7 fps: 62 frames (8.6 seconds)

Hopefully tomorrow night I'll sleep well, dreaming that the RAM is double in the production models! :-)

P.S. to Paperman: the numbers in the specs (200 frames!) is based on the assumption of a fast card clearing the RAM during shooting. Hence a slow card (e.g., a 10 dollar class 10) will hit the wall after the RAM is full, currently seemingly at 29 or 30 frames, not 200. Now, many people will never need more than a 3 second burst. Certainly anyone willing to be "limited" to 3 seconds at 10 fps should seriously consider staying with cheap cards, and put any other money toward something else, like upgrading their glass!

Paperman

Michael said:

P.S. to Paperman: the numbers in the specs (200 frames!) is based on the assumption of a fast card clearing the RAM during shooting.

Well, that's a different story then ...

heartyfisher

@micheal "Certainly anyone willing to be "limited" to 3 seconds at 10 fps should seriously consider staying with cheap cards, and put any other money toward something else, like upgrading their glass!"

Until recently I only had class 4 SD cards in the second slot cos i shoot Raw+ Jpg, the jpg assigned to slot 2 :-) and i think I have a few extra accessories because of it :-)

So I will probably recycle my cards if i do get the D500 and just get one XQD :-) I am sure SD cards will be more than adequate for writing Jpg files.

haroldp

As long as the D500 is as big and heavy as a D810, and the lenses are as Big and Heavy, and any prime over 50mm is an FX lens anyway, I personally will carry another D810 body. Given lens, subject and camera motion etc., 16 mp DX or 20 mp Dx is the same to me, and using the center AF, and cropping later has saved many shots for me.

5 fps (6 in DX) is fast enough for me, D810 buffers have never filled in real shooting for me (with 1066X lexar CF), and I do a lot of wildlife and BIF.

If Nikon produced a pro control mode DX body at the size of a D5500 which can be done (look at the Fuji X-T1 or T10,) and lenses the size and performance of the Fuji's for DX, I would be a buyer, but carrying the same size / weight for the privilege of being forced to crop in the camera and a few more fps does not do it for me. Particularly when in applications where fps 'might' matter, I am putting $ 5-10k glass on anyhow and at current discounts the difference between a D500 and D810 is 800.

I will wait for the D8nn and keep my D810 for secondary glass.

HockeyMan

Although the D500 looks about as big as a D800/810 and the specs show only a minor difference, it does feel smaller. I was holding the D5 just before handling the D500, and so my judgement could be clouded, but it didn't feel heavy at all. I think I mentioned in another thread that it doesn't have the heft of a D800/810. Assuming your D810 feels like my D800 you will definitely feel the difference if you hold your D810, then hold the D500.

Then again, if you have a D810, you probably don't use DX lenses, so your camera/lens weight will not be that different between D810 and D500. Unless you want to spend even more money on DX lenes...

donaldejose

A rule of thumb is that when the megapixels in a sensor increase 25% you can easily see the difference. Thus, you should be able to easily see a difference between 16mp DX and 20.9 mp DX. But we will see when it is out. Perhaps the replacement for the D810 will be a 50+ megapixel sensor which will put even more megapixels in the DX area. Again, we will see when it is out. I continue to think the most interesting thing will be to compare the D5 to the D500 since so much is essentially the same other than FX vs. DX sensors.

manhattanboy

haroldp said:

As long as the D500 is as big and heavy as a D810, and the lenses are as Big and Heavy, and any prime over 50mm is an FX lens anyway, I personally will carry another D810 body. Given lens, subject and camera motion etc., 16 mp DX or 20 mp Dx is the same to me, and using the center AF, and cropping later has saved many shots for me.

5 fps (6 in DX) is fast enough for me, D810 buffers have never filled in real shooting for me (with 1066X lexar CF), and I do a lot of wildlife and BIF.

If Nikon produced a pro control mode DX body at the size of a D5500 which can be done (look at the Fuji X-T1 or T10,) and lenses the size and performance of the Fuji's for DX, I would be a buyer, but carrying the same size / weight for the privilege of being forced to crop in the camera and a few more fps does not do it for me. Particularly when in applications where fps 'might' matter, I am putting $ 5-10k glass on anyhow and at current discounts the difference between a D500 and D810 is 800.

I will wait for the D8nn and keep my D810 for secondary glass.

The main things for me besides the fps are the tilting screen WiFi and better AF.
However I am with you that the 810 has largely replaced my DX camera. Maybe I will cancel my D500 order. I am still pissed Nikon discontinued the 1 series and left me with a bunch of expensive useless glass. Why should I invest further into Nikon as they are likely to discontinue the F mount in the future when they introduce their new mirror less system.

donaldejose

I didn't hear that Nikon discontinued the 1 series? They are still on nikonusa.com

heartyfisher

LOL! you are getting pissed for nothing .. the Nikon 1 series is still around.
And i have been using my Nikkors on the my Nikon1 camera. I am sure the Nikkor F mount lenses will be usable on any full frame mirrorless from Nikon. The sky is not falling !

Re D810 vs D500 , I think for many the D810 or D750 will be the better option. FX is FX afterall and there are some real IQ advantages if you have the lenses in the ranges you want/need. I have considered it fairly throughly I think.

1) D810 is a seriously great camera but for me the cost having a D810/D820 would mean having only one camera with no good backup and going backwards in Optical functionality cos i will need more FX glass. If you have the financial means, it is a great option especially when we are expecting the AF goodies in the D500 in the D820. For me having both DX and FX options has been an absolute joy!

2) DX vs FX.. : in terms of IQ my D610 is darn good. but my D7200 is darn good too. Not as good but very very close and with most subjects and situations there is no difference. I am expecting the D500 to be even better and from the samples I have seen.. it is better so I would rate the D500 at least equal to the D810 and much better than my D7200 and worth the DX upgrade.

3) My primary subjects : Here I think for everyone it will be very very different. You will need to choose the tools that best fits your requirements. As for me I enjoy macro the most. Love to go birding but have not had the tools until recently to do it any justice. Have been enjoying "Walk and Shoot" events all around the city with various Meetup photography groups ie. general do anything photography with as versatile a toolset as possible. Of these general photo events I have enjoyed night photography a lot. general walking around doing Street that usually drift past twilight. Thus my main subjects are, Macro, Birding, Street esp around twilight and Landsape.

I have been using almost every lense and camera I have.. lots of fun! again having the DX and FX option has been amazing fun and versatile. It would be really frustratingly limiting going back to only one format. So after evaluating my requirements it looks to me the best option for me would be to stay with DX as my primary toolset with FX and CX providing a nice expanded versitality. The pro DX tool I had (Fuji S5pro D200 clone) was a most enjoyable primary tool that I had. I have been searching for an upgrade for YEARS and YEARS. My search has resulted in the looking at of Fuji, pentax, samsung and the getting of V1, D7000, D7200 and D610 which has been a lot of fun... but It kind of feels like its going to be like "home" going with the D500.

That's me. But I fully understand the attraction of the D750 / D810. I would have got them if my requirements, both the Subjects I shoot and my Wallet, did not show that the DX format is by far the optimal solution for me. For my subjects, I currently grab my D7200 the most and have even used the old S5pro (so nice). I intend to get more gear for my current interest in birding. Would also like to do more theater shoots again.

My next purchase ? ... I am so so so tempted by the D500, but the new 200-500 looks yummy =P~ , maybe both? or just get the 80-400 and use it with the D7200.. That could be really nice too and more versatile .... sigh .. Darn NAS @-)

D500 It is ... I am going home !!

retread

As my wallet allows it looks simple to me. D500 for everything that moves fast and the D8?? for things that don't.

No more big glass until than is paid for.

rmp

What is the first expected deliver date of the D500?

Ironheart

Unknown, possibly in April.

DaveyJ

April is being stated to me. Pre-orders are high....this camera is going to prove that those looking for a pro DX Nikon DSLR were not speculating, or joking. Everything I see about that camera looks for real. I did also look at the Nikon DL 18-50 "ultra wide angle and admit I come away saying nice looking camera but I'll put my money in DX thank you......if I waiver from that it will be a D810 or D750.....our Nikon 1AW 1 is very heavily used here, but some of these arenas are pretty late entry for Nikon. Now for mystery Nikons the 360 Key Mission is the puzzle.....looks like Nikon's answer to the very successful and VERY copied Go Pro.

Msmoto

I am thinking I will go this route.....like the sound of 1200mm equivalent on this body sounds great for catching Indy Car racing this summer....from a long way off.....

I could even see this being something I would use instead of the D4 if the actual performance in the field holds up.

Photobug

rmp said:

What is the first expected deliver date of the D500?

My local dealer says May for the D500.

Sports

And while we're waiting, this is worth a read .....
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0467323998/cp-2016-features-you-need-to-know-about-on-the-nikon-d5-d500

heartyfisher

Sports said:

And while we're waiting, this is worth a read .....
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0467323998/cp-2016-features-you-need-to-know-about-on-the-nikon-d5-d500

LOL thats a lot of esoteric functions !! Maybe I don't need a D500 after all...



:-\"

donaldejose

Good to see all the functions. Nikon is serious about making this a DX pro body.

rmp

Help! On a D500, what lens would be best for taking still-pictures and videos of a marlin jumping at 300 meters? And I do mean high quality pictures for huge enlargements.

Photobug

rmp said:

Help! On a D500, what lens would be best for taking still-pictures and videos of a marlin jumping at 300 meters? And I do mean high quality pictures for huge enlargements.

Suggest the 70-200mm F2.8 and potentially the TC1.4X. @rel your right on with your comment about high quality images....for that you need high quality glass. The new 300mm would be good but I really think you need the zoom lens since backing up with a 300mm lens could put you and the camera gear in the water.

rmp

Thanks Photbug. I think the 70-200 will be right for the phots, but what about the videos? Is there a focus issue for videos?

fiziks

At 300m, even with the TC1.4, I don't think the 70-200mm will cut it. He said 300 meters, not 300 ft. I use a 70-200mm at skating rinks and I'm cropping images where the subject is at the opposite end of the rink. At best an ice rink is 200 feet long. 300meters is almost five times that distance. I would suggest Nikon's new 200-500mm 5.6, or perhaps Sigma's 150-600mm Sport. I have not used either of those lenses, but I've used Sigma's 50-500mm to shoot air shows and was very impressed with it's sharpness on a D300s.

Sports

Agree that 200mm is not enough, even with a TC. Far from it, I'm afraid.
Nikon 200-500 w TC1.4
If the budget is unlimited then one of the big tele primes, of course (hoping it doesn't get too wet) :-)