D500 General Discussion Thread

Rmologic

I spoke of aperture ring on camera. Sorry my bad it appears to be a F stop lever around the outside of the lens mount. Will need to return and study it to be more specific. sorry for the confusion. R

vtc2002

@ricochet,@spraynpray, @ironheart, etc. You have missed Pitchback's point. It wasn't that the D400/D500 would never be released it was that at the time everyone was discussing a camera that had not been released and there were no rumors that it would be released and yet there was this continuous discussion in practically every thread about this fictional camera. He was trying to point out the waste of time and energy discussing something that at that point did not exist (and no assurance that it would be released) and that wouldn't we all be better off discussing photographic techniques and sharing knowledge with each other. Better yet go out and take some photographs with the camera you have in your possession.
The last time I checked it was 53 pages... yes 53 pages of post about a camera that had not been released and no rumors that it would be released anytime in the near future. Do any you spend that much time talking with your doctor, stock broker, spouse, children, etc. about things that are occurring in your life that are real and impact your lives?
The mythical D400 thread will fade (or perhaps it will not) but new threads discussing the D810 replacement and all the things Nikon did not deliver in the D500 and other mental masturbation threads are popping up. You look at other Photography websites like Photography Life and you do not see the discussions that are prevalent at NR.
Pitchback is correct in that this is one of the reasons for the lack and decline of traffic at Nikon Rumors.

donaldejose

I think that "slip ring" is for older manual focus lenses.

PB_PM

And it's called the "AI metering tab". It is used for the camera to read the aperture on AI, and AF lenses. It's been on all mid-upper end Nikon bodies from the release of the first Nikon DSLR (actually well before that, but lets not talk about film cameras here).

Ironheart

Good idea to shrink the Nikon 200-500 to DX size. Also, shrink the 70-200 f2.8, the 24-70 f2.8 and the 300mm f2.8 (or maybe just use the 300 f3 PF lens).

No lens longer than 60-65 mm will have any benefit from being made for DX only. (That said, I wonder why the hell the 85 mm macro is not a FX lens)

Not sure where you got this information from, but it's not true. Regardless of focal length, it's worth about a stop.

For example, if you take a 50mm f/2.8 FX lens, you could produce a 50mm f/2 DX lens that would be the same size and weight, given the 1.5x crop factor. This would give you a stop greater light, but would have the same DoF as the f/2.8 also due to the crop factor.

Put another way, you could design a 50mm f/2.8 DX lens that would be the same size and weight as a 50mm f/4 FX lens (see the 1-stop equivalency?)

This is where practicality and market forces come into play. What most manufacturers do is a three way hit. They make a lens that is two stops slower and optimized for the crop (APS-C) format, and they reduce the focal length to give an equivalent to FX. This gives them a triple win, so that the lens is smaller and lighter by almost a 3-stop factor because they've made a shorter, slower lens.

For example the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 vs. the 24-70 f/2.8.

The 24-70 Approx. 3.3 x 5.2" (8.38 x 13.21 cm)
Weight 1.98 lb (900 g)

And the 18-55 Approx. 2.34 x 2.60" (59.5 x 66 mm)
Weight 6.88 oz (195 g)

This is just pure marketing, because Nikon could make a 18-55 that was just as fast. Oh wait, they do, it just costs 8x as much:

17-55 f/2.8 Approx. 3.4 x 4.4" (8.64 x 11.18 cm)
Weight 1.66 lb (755 g)

But see, it is still has a size weight advantage over the FX equivalent.

Finally, lets' look at the siggy 18-35 f/1.8 DX lens

18-35 f/1.8 Approx. 3.07 x 4.76" (78 x 121 mm)
Weight 1.78 lb (811 g)

Almost as big as the 24-70 f/2.8 FX.

donaldejose

As I recall PitchBlack did say a D400 would never be released and if it were he would eat his hat. He did also think there was too much discussion of what a D400 should be. The simple answer to this issue was to stop reading the D400 threads. We all simply do not read threads we are not interested in. Demanding other people stop discussing something they want to discuss (i.e. the yet to appear D400 or D820) is not the correct answer.

PB_PM

For Nikon it has less to do with, will it make the lens lighter and smaller; they have to consider if it will make a profit after R&D and production. With DX, it's just not there. Lens like the 35mm F1.8G DX make sense, it's a normal lens and sells very well. The higher end DX glass has sold in very small numbers (250,000 17-55mm F2.8G's in 12 years!), if they are lucky the products turn a small profit. The big money comes from FX glass (24-70mm F2.8G sold around 900,000 copies in 7 years), so that is what they make the most of.

Most DX camera buyers get the 18-xxx kit lens and maybe a 55-xxx or 70-300mm VR. As noted before the sale of higher end DX glass just isn't there to make up for R&D.

Rmologic

Thank you for the clarification. I have not experienced the higher end bodies except at shows
@ Donaldejose
@PB_PM
Thank you both for setting me straight. Cheers. R

Pistnbroke

So does this thing have an AA/low pass filter or not ???

donaldejose

We will see about "higher end" DX glass over the next two years now that we have a "higher end" DX body to match with glass. People spending $1,000 on a DX body likely will be willing to spend $1,500 on glass. Maybe Nikon will produce a 24=70 and 70-210 "higher end" DX glass. Or Maybe Sigma Art will come to the rescue and produce the lenses Nikon won't. Once again, Sigma could exploit a market niche Nikon has not filled.

spraynpray

@vtc2002 As Donald said, PitchBlack did say he would eat his hat as well as lots of other things some of which you mentioned above. As for your comment that he is correct that this is one of the reasons for the lack of traffic, well, that is illogical baseless nonsense. This is a rumour site and rumours are never complete and accurate in the early days, so people talk, discuss, guess, vent their frustration with threads like this. The size of the thread merely indicates the size of interest in (and market for) the D400. No, the lack of traffic was (past tense) because of the lack of any rumours of the D400. Now it has been announced, there is plenty of traffic. As these products come to market there will be plenty of other threads too.

PB_PM

We will see about "higher end" DX glass over the next two years now that we have a "higher end" DX body to match with glass. People spending $1,000 on a DX body likely will be willing to spend $1,500 on glass. Maybe Nikon will produce a 24=70 and 70-210 "higher end" DX glass. Or Maybe Sigma Art will come to the rescue and produce the lenses Nikon won't. Once again, Sigma could exploit a market niche Nikon has not filled.

Yes, I think it will be up to Sigma, Tamron and Tokina. I don't see Nikon doing it based on their track record; Nikon has been making DX bodies for 17 years now, and there are only three higher end DX lenses, the 12-24mm F4G, 17-55mm F2.8G and the 16-85mm F2.8-4E VR, the latter of which is more of a mid-range. So even when the D2X, D2H were the top of the line cameras, there were only two "pro" DX lenses announced. None were released during the D300/D300s production cycle (6 years).

Would I like to see Nikon make high end DX glass? Sure, who wouldn't? Nikon would take over the crop DSLR market if they did, since Canon has also refused to make high quality crop sensor lenses.

manhattanboy

So does this thing have an AA/low pass filter or not ???

No filter... its in the Q&A sheets posted on the main page

Cheers. R

@Rmologic Thanks for all that you have done! Very appreciated!

Would I like to see Nikon make high end DX glass? Sure, who wouldn't? Nikon would take over the crop DSLR market if they did, since Canon has also refused to make high quality crop sensor lenses.

One possibility is that Canon may release some crop frame glass in response to Nikon's announcement and eventually Nikon may respond. What was interesting from the reading on the main page's Q&A is that Nikon started work on the D500 the year that they got wind Canon would be releasing the 7DM2.

Ironheart

We will see about "higher end" DX glass over the next two years now that we have a "higher end" DX body to match with glass. People spending $1,000 on a DX body likely will be willing to spend $1,500 on glass. Maybe Nikon will produce a 24=70 and 70-210 "higher end" DX glass. Or Maybe Sigma Art will come to the rescue and produce the lenses Nikon won't. Once again, Sigma could exploit a market niche Nikon has not filled.

Yes, I think it will be up to Sigma, Tamron and Tokina. I don't see Nikon doing it based on their track record; Nikon has been making DX bodies for 17 years now, and there are only three higher end DX lenses, the 12-24mm F4G, 17-55mm F2.8G and the 16-85mm F2.8-4E VR, the latter of which is more of a mid-range. So even when the D2X, D2H were the top of the line cameras, there were only two "pro" DX lenses announced. None were released during the D300/D300s production cycle (6 years).

Would I like to see Nikon make high end DX glass? Sure, who wouldn't? Nikon would take over the crop DSLR market if they did, since Canon has also refused to make high quality crop sensor lenses.


Just a quick nit, the lens is the 16-80mm f/2.8-4E VR, the 16-85 is a f/3.5-5.6G VR and no ED coating, etc... at $700 it is a step down from the 16-80 at $1070


The summary of my diatribe above is that Nikon most likely considers the excellent f/4 zooms as "DX friendly" enough not to make DX equivalents.

PB_PM

Just a quick nit, the lens is the 16-80mm f/2.8-4E VR, the 16-85 is a f/3.5-5.6G VR and no ED coating, etc... at $700 it is a step down from the 16-80 at $1070

The summary of my diatribe above is that Nikon most likely considers the excellent f/4 zooms as "DX friendly" enough not to make DX equivalents.

Tells you how much attention I pay to DX glass...

Yes, I suspect that is Nikon's take on the matter as well.

CaMeRaQuEsT

Rmlogic, thank you for your thorough study on D500's shutter noise. Admin on the main blog site has just posted some Nikon confidential papers regarding both the D5 and the D500 and there is an actual explanation of the D500's noisier shutter compared to that of the D810: Nikon has used metal on the D500 instead of composites on the D810 for the shutter construction (blades maybe, they don't specify) to allow for the twice as fast frame rate. So no way to directly compare the D500's shutter sound and feel with that of the other bodies . Real world usage will shed more light on if there is or not shutter/mirror shock affecting certain shutter speeds like they do on the other Nikon DX carbon fiber bodies.

vtc2002

As I recall PitchBlack did say a D400 would never be released and if it were he would eat his hat. He did also think there was too much discussion of what a D400 should be. The simple answer to this issue was to stop reading the D400 threads. We all simply do not read threads we are not interested in. Demanding other people stop discussing something they want to discuss (i.e. the yet to appear D400 or D820) is not the correct answer.

He was trying to get a response and make the point of the endless discussion. If the comments were restricted to the D400 thread it would not have been as annoying but practically every thread had some reference to the D400 so it was not as simple as skipping or not reading a thread related to that topic. I agree with you regarding his tactic of demanding people stop talking about something it was inappropriate.

@vtc2002 As Donald said, PitchBlack did say he would eat his hat as well as lots of other things some of which you mentioned above. As for your comment that he is correct that this is one of the reasons for the lack of traffic, well, that is illogical baseless nonsense. This is a rumour site and rumours are never complete and accurate in the early days, so people talk, discuss, guess, vent their frustration with threads like this. The size of the thread merely indicates the size of interest in (and market for) the D400. No, the lack of traffic was (past tense) because of the lack of any rumours of the D400. Now it has been announced, there is plenty of traffic. As these products come to market there will be plenty of other threads too.

His statement of eating his hat, etc. was to make a point regarding the endless discussion and the lack of moderation. If the comments regarding the D400 had been confined to a single thread it would not have been an issue. But as a reader coming to this site or any other site and you start reading a thread about a specific topic and there is off topic information it is very frustrating and confusing. In addition, there are threads were comments have been made that are not factual and he and others have referenced specific pages in Nikon User Manuals and the original poster continues so assert that they are correct. These are the individuals that Pitchblack was referring to as having taken over the site. Beginner(and knowledgeable readers) coming to this site get frustrated reading incorrect information. I have referred new and dedicated Nikon photographers to NR and a number of them did not see the value of the site. I agree that this is a rumor site but there comes a point where it the discussion gets out of control. I agree that Pitchblack approach was inappropriate and I am not defending his approach. He is correct regarding spending less time discussing things to death instead of using the equipment you have. The quality of the Nikon equipment that is in the market today is outstanding and should be used to take some great photos as long as someone is not sitting behind a computer screen and is actually using it.
I am glad traffic has increased. Having a website that traffic is dependent upon the release of new products will have a very cyclic traffic pattern seems problematic. My comment and I think the point that Pitchblack was trying to make was to suggest alternatives for attracting and keeping new visitors to the site. I do not think it is illogical baseless nonsense as you suggest but only a suggestion for improving the site.
I am not trying to be confrontational. I personally like NR and I have met a number of talented and very kind individuals (including Mark) that are willing to share their knowledge and experience.

manhattanboy

Check out this video of the new autofocus module. yes this is the D5 but its the same af module in the d500
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1Fs-_rj1s5o

donaldejose

Beginner(and knowledgeable readers) coming to this site get frustrated reading incorrect information.
That doesn't seem to have been the case with KR's site! LOL

vtc2002

Beginner(and knowledgeable readers) coming to this site get frustrated reading incorrect information.
That doesn't seem to have been the case with KR's site! LOL

I agree. I have never understood the attraction to his site. My brother in law was a avid follower of Ken until he took his advice on a camera and regretted it. That was about 10 years ago and he still talks about it.

WestEndFoto

I agree with VTC2002's comments, particularly from the perspective of improving the site's appeal.

Ironheart

I agree with your agreement. I think what we are saying is a bit more moderation is a good thing? But not too much.

WestEndFoto

Yes, but as users we may also want to come up with new topics of discussion which will attract new users. Pitchblack's discussion on post processing was brilliant.

spraynpray

Yes, but as users we may also want to come up with new topics of discussion which will attract new users. Pitchblack's discussion on post processing was brilliant.

Yes, it is up to the members to come up with new topics and make them appeal to a wide audience.

NR is a new product rumour site so traffic will always follow product launches and nobody knows for sure what the features and specs are until launch so there will always be 'inaccurate information' AKA conjecture/guesses/hopes mentioned here.

FreezeAction

I like that word "Hopes". I'm already nit picking the D500 I have not received yet. Anxious.