D500 General Discussion Thread

1568101149

Comments

  • BabaGanoushBabaGanoush Posts: 252Member
    "Speaking of the 16-80, have you all been happy with its auto-focus performance? The review of it on LensTip was quite critical of its AF speed and accuracy, which if true makes it seem like an odd pairing with a sports camera that needs quick and accurate AF."

    I agree with some of what they wrote and find the lens a bit disappointing. I bought one three weeks ago to go with my new D7200 (purchased 6 weeks ago). After a lot of testing, I am not absolutely thrilled with the lens but decided I can live with its shortcomings. It's very sharp in the center; wide open or nearly wide open the corners are soft, but stopping down does help. I will live with that.

    When I fine tuned the lens, I found micro adjustment values that ranged from +1 at 16 mm to +6 or +7 at 80 mm (a far smaller range of values than reported by LensTip). At FL=80mm, the difference in IQ between a tuning value of +3 and +7 is quite significant. I regard the IQ at the former value as unacceptable. As the average (saved) value for the lens, I initially settled on +5, but finally settled on +4. The problem is that with this tuning value, the focus at FL=80 mm for distant objects at "infinity" is not very sharp. In particular, the corners remain soft even at f/8. Frankly, I can do better with my Panasonic GX8 and my Sony D6000 camera. However, the Live View mode on the D7200 turns out to be very nimble. If I need the sharpest focus on distant object at the longest FLs, I've decided I will just switch into live view for that shot. In practice, I've found the focus issue is not a problem for close-ups.
  • framerframer Posts: 491Member
    I've been giving the D500 a hard look and the bottom line is I'm going to wait a couple of more years and see what the "S" models fixes. I bought a D810 only a couple years ago and normally buy at 4 - 5 year intervals. Before that I bought a D3s in Jan 2010. The D3s and D810 was been a great combo and as much as I want to NFC, Bluetooth and real built in WIFI, jury still out on that, I'm going to wait.

    framer
  • tcole1983tcole1983 Posts: 981Member
    Why? Because those mediocre "kit" lenses actually sell in the millions during their production cycles, and make Nikon big bucks. On the other hand, Nikon would be very unlikely to ship over 300,000 17-55mm F2.8E VR lenses in it's entire production cycle (10 years). From the numbers I'm seeing, Nikon made less than 250,000 17-55mm F2.8G lenses in 12 years!

    Making pro DX lenses just is not cost effective, otherwise they would be doing it!
    Same could be said about lots of FX lenses...how many 300+ mm lenses are sold? You can't tell me they are selling even a hundred thousand 600mm lenses. Shoot I haven't even seen a 300 f2.8 in person before.


    D5200, D5000, S31, 18-55 VR, 17-55 F2.8, 35 F1.8G, 105 F2.8 VR, 300 F4 AF-S (Previously owned 18-200 VRI, Tokina 12-24 F4 II)
  • tcole1983tcole1983 Posts: 981Member
    edited January 2016
    Why? Because those mediocre "kit" lenses actually sell in the millions during their production cycles, and make Nikon big bucks. On the other hand, Nikon would be very unlikely to ship over 300,000 17-55mm F2.8E VR lenses in it's entire production cycle (10 years). From the numbers I'm seeing, Nikon made less than 250,000 17-55mm F2.8G lenses in 12 years!

    Making pro DX lenses just is not cost effective, otherwise they would be doing it!
    Wow double post...I posted this yesterday or something and it just came through...weird.
    Post edited by tcole1983 on
    D5200, D5000, S31, 18-55 VR, 17-55 F2.8, 35 F1.8G, 105 F2.8 VR, 300 F4 AF-S (Previously owned 18-200 VRI, Tokina 12-24 F4 II)
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    "The size of the viewfinder is limited by the size of the mirror." Not quite.

    https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-dk-17m-magnifying-eyepiece

    I would think this magnification could be engineered into the pentaprism system to make a D500 image more the size of an FX image. Brightness is likely limited by the f stop of the lens attached to the body.
  • fiziksfiziks Posts: 12Member
    Making pro DX lenses just is not cost effective, otherwise they would be doing it!
    You would think, but no. They sold over 1.3 million of the 35mm 1.8 DX primes. And they sold 120,000 10.5mm 2.8 DX's (more than all the 16mm 2.8 variants they've sold since they started making them in the 1970s). Nikon has made very few DX primes, but even the worst one, the 85mm 3.5 sold over 45,000 copies to date, more copies than some of the FX primes that they keep iterating. But to be fair, they sold over 900,000 copies of their two 24-70mm variants and *only* 200,000 of the 17-55mm. And I suspect that is probably the main data point they look at and they are worried that ANY prime or f/2.8 or f/4 zoom will see numbers about 1/4 to 1/5 of their FX equivalents.

    lens serial number and quantities: www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    Why? Because those mediocre "kit" lenses actually sell in the millions during their production cycles, and make Nikon big bucks. On the other hand, Nikon would be very unlikely to ship over 300,000 17-55mm F2.8E VR lenses in it's entire production cycle (10 years). From the numbers I'm seeing, Nikon made less than 250,000 17-55mm F2.8G lenses in 12 years!

    Making pro DX lenses just is not cost effective, otherwise they would be doing it!
    Same could be said about lots of FX lenses...how many 300+ mm lenses are sold? You can't tell me they are selling even a hundred thousand 600mm lenses. Shoot I haven't even seen a 300 f2.8 in person before.


    The profit margins on the supertelephoto lenses are in a totally different ball park, and they lenses work on all ILC cameras Nikon makes. Also, they are flagship items at push the brand. Many pros buy Nikon gear because those exist. When the 17-55mm F2.8G came out that was true for that lens as well. When the D3 came along that changed, and DX was no longer the flagship product, thus the lack of flagship level products.

    I suspect that the 16-80mm F2.8 VR is a test to see if there still is a market for high end DX glass. If it sells well you might see more, but if not don't count on it.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    Why? Because those mediocre "kit" lenses actually sell in the millions during their production cycles, and make Nikon big bucks. On the other hand, Nikon would be very unlikely to ship over 300,000 17-55mm F2.8E VR lenses in it's entire production cycle (10 years). From the numbers I'm seeing, Nikon made less than 250,000 17-55mm F2.8G lenses in 12 years!

    Making pro DX lenses just is not cost effective, otherwise they would be doing it!
    Same could be said about lots of FX lenses...how many 300+ mm lenses are sold? You can't tell me they are selling even a hundred thousand 600mm lenses. Shoot I haven't even seen a 300 f2.8 in person before.


    The profit margins on the supertelephoto lenses are in a totally different ball park, and they lenses work on all ILC cameras Nikon makes. Also, they are flagship items at push the brand. Many pros buy Nikon gear because those exist. When the 17-55mm F2.8G came out that was true for that lens as well. When the D3 came along that changed, and DX was no longer the flagship product, thus the lack of flagship level products.

    I suspect that the 16-80mm F2.8 VR is a test to see if there still is a market for high end DX glass. If it sells well you might see more, but if not don't count on it.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    edited January 2016
    "The size of the viewfinder is limited by the size of the mirror." Not quite.

    https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-dk-17m-magnifying-eyepiece

    I would think this magnification could be engineered into the pentaprism system to make a D500 image more the size of an FX image. Brightness is likely limited by the f stop of the lens attached to the body.
    I use this on my D800. I lose 100% coverage with it, but it helps with manual focus with my AIS lenses. I often find myself squinting around the corner to see where the edge of the frame is.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    This new body by Nikon is just awesome.
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
  • nikon_nutnikon_nut Posts: 1Member
    D500 has stadium lighting anti-flicker ala 7DII, not so the D5, kinda weird.
    Yay! No more orange shots in crappy high school stadiums.

  • vtc2002vtc2002 Posts: 364Member
    I've been giving the D500 a hard look and the bottom line is I'm going to wait a couple of more years and see what the "S" models fixes. I bought a D810 only a couple years ago and normally buy at 4 - 5 year intervals. Before that I bought a D3s in Jan 2010. The D3s and D810 was been a great combo and as much as I want to NFC, Bluetooth and real built in WIFI, jury still out on that, I'm going to wait.

    framer
    @framer I am in your camp. All three of my D800's had issues that were fixed with the D810. I think the D810 is highly underrated camera. Everyone assumed it was a minor upgrade but for me it was significant. The D810 replacement will need have more than just a increase in mega pixels for me to buy the replacement. 48 or 50 mega pixels is not a significant jump for me to upgrade. I also have a D3s and combined with the D810's they fill all of my needs at the moment. If Nikon releases some new glass I will invest in that otherwise I will be buying some additional Sigma Art glass.
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    edited January 2016
    Just a note on the high ISO ability of the D500. One person who tested the D5 and posted many photos has said he estimated the high ISO is improved about one and one half stops over the D4s.
    "Based on the jpg-files I have reviewed and edited, the image quality up to ISO 12 800 looks very clean. I would not have any problems including most of these ISO 12 800 images in my image bank or for high quality printing. With the D4S cameras this image quality was equal to approx. ISO 4000 – 5000. This is something like 1.5 stop improved ISO performance, which is very good."
    http://oleliodden.com/photo-gear/field-reviews/beta-test-report-nikon-d5/
    Hopefully, the same will be true of the D500: a 1.5 stop improvement over the D7200.
    Also, note that the native and expanded ranges of the D500 are exactly one stop less than the native and expanded ranges of the D5. So if a D5 ISO 12,800 out of camera jpg "looks very clean" so may a D500 ISO 6,400 out of camera jpg. If both of these cameras do deliver about a 1.5 high ISO improvement that will be quite a shock to DxOMark ratings! Currently DxOMark rated the D4s clean at ISO 3074 and the D7200 clean at 1333. Doubling these numbers would be amazing.
    Post edited by donaldejose on
  • FreezeActionFreezeAction Posts: 862Member
    After closely looking at photos and comparing noise levels from the D810 and D7200 I'm going to cancel the D500 or at least wait until I see proof of what the noise is like. I'm skittish about just getting more shots faster still noisy. Ratings don't mean a lot seemingly from Nikon or Canon. The D7200 at ISO 25,600 is not match for the D810 with only a rating of ISO 12,800. Both sets of images taken with the same Nikon 70-200 f4 on the same night. I'll spend the money for a new 70-200 f2.8 and gain a stop with the D810 and use the f4 lens on the D7200 for daylight games. I just don't trust any brands ratings for high ISO. I've down loaded their own samples and printed them out and it's just not good enough all to often.
  • tcole1983tcole1983 Posts: 981Member
    After closely looking at photos and comparing noise levels from the D810 and D7200 I'm going to cancel the D500 or at least wait until I see proof of what the noise is like. I'm skittish about just getting more shots faster still noisy. Ratings don't mean a lot seemingly from Nikon or Canon. The D7200 at ISO 25,600 is not match for the D810 with only a rating of ISO 12,800. Both sets of images taken with the same Nikon 70-200 f4 on the same night. I'll spend the money for a new 70-200 f2.8 and gain a stop with the D810 and use the f4 lens on the D7200 for daylight games. I just don't trust any brands ratings for high ISO. I've down loaded their own samples and printed them out and it's just not good enough all to often.
    The fact that they kept the MPs at 20 seems to point at good ISO control. I wouldn't be surprised if it is really as good as everyone is hoping. Nikon has been a leader in this and it is one thing they are consistently doing well.
    D5200, D5000, S31, 18-55 VR, 17-55 F2.8, 35 F1.8G, 105 F2.8 VR, 300 F4 AF-S (Previously owned 18-200 VRI, Tokina 12-24 F4 II)
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,182Member
    edited January 2016
    "Currently DxOMark rated the D4s clean at ISO 3074 and the D7200 clean at 1333. Doubling these numbers would be amazing." @donaldejose

    Doubt it.. dxo deals with raw files. and what we have seen so far are the result of the Expeed processed files. I will be happy with some improvements raw wise even a 1/2 stop will be quite nice. I do hope that it may be close to double the DXO numbers due to it being likely the new "stacked" sensor from Sony but I cant see it really hapenning.
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    Good point heartyfisher. What we have seen so far have been out of camera jpgs so they they have been processed in camera by Nikon's noise reduction software. But some people claim processing RAW files through third party noise reduction software will be even better than what we have seen so far.
  • FreezeActionFreezeAction Posts: 862Member
    I processed some in the D7200 camera firmware and flattened some faces. That has me concerned over the D500. Not taking that chance. If and when I see it then I'll believe it. I bought the f2.8 70-200 today and can rent a body to test with in my nasty shooting environment. That is the only way to really know.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,182Member
    edited January 2016
    There are so many nice things about the D500 :-) but there are a few things that worry me about the D500.. For me macro photography is a big part of my photography life.

    1) Noise ... sounds ( ;-) ) like it could be quite loud.
    2) No pop up flash, I didn't get the DF because it didn't have a popup flash. now this doesn't have one either :-( My main use of the popup is with off camera macro.
    3) Price.. Its just about double the price of my D7200. is it double the fun and value ? Could be !!
    4) XQD card.. Its functional.. and probably required for the 200 frames of 10FPS. But costs and availability in the future are unlikely to be good. Guess you just need 2 of them :-)
    5) Its probably the last non-mirrorless Highend DSLR. Do I want to own the last dinosaur? No more upgrades! But gosh it sure is going out with a bang !!

    There are so many nice things though ... so so yummy !!

    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,487Moderator
    I, like you hearty, do a lot of macro and thought it wouldn't help me but it would be neat to have 10fps for handheld stacks. The fact that the flash commander isn't built in is a real problem though. I suppose I could get round it with a cord though. :))
    Always learning.
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,415Member
    When it is out we will see what can be done. My guess is that a bracket attached to the bottom of the camera with flash mounted on the bracket and TTL cord will work quite well. Also, flash on top of camera with 4x6 card rubber banded to the top of the flash to bounce light down will work quite well. Finally, the WR-R10 would work quite well. BUT, if you want the convenience of popping up a flash on the spur of the moment for an unexpected macro shot, the D500 will be lacking. You will have to plan to have the added equipment with you.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,675Member
    edited January 2016
    There are so many nice things about the D500 :-) but there are a few things that worry me about the D500.. For me macro photography is a big part of my photography life.

    1) Noise ... sounds ( ;-) ) like it could be quite loud.
    2) No pop up flash, I didn't get the DF because it didn't have a popup flash. now this doesn't have one either :-( My main use of the popup is with off camera macro.
    3) Price.. Its just about double the price of my D7200. is it double the fun and value ? Could be !!
    4) XQD card.. Its functional.. and probably required for the 200 frames of 10FPS. But costs and availability in the future are unlikely to be good. Guess you just need 2 of them :-)
    5) Its probably the last non-mirrorless Highend DSLR. Do I want to own the last dinosaur? No more upgrades! But gosh it sure is going out with a bang !!

    There are so many nice things though ... so so yummy !!

    The last non-mirrorless highend DSLR? High end DSLRs, where focus is everything, will be the last to go mirrorless. I will be surprised if the D7 is mirrorless, let alone the D6. 25 fps with the mirror locked up? Sure. But I think that dispensing with the mirror is a stretch. All the advantages of a mirrorless matter the least at the high end and all the disadvantages matter the most.

    The numbering has me thinking about mirrorless at the low end though. It seems to suggest that the D6xx will be Nikon's low end FX DSLR. It also seems to suggest that while Nikon will offer cheaper FX cameras, they will be mirrorless with a new numbering system.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,487Moderator
    My guess is that a bracket attached to the bottom of the camera with flash mounted on the bracket and TTL cord will work quite well.

    You will have to plan to have the added equipment with you.

    With one exception (roosting dragonfly at night), all my macro is well and truly planned. The cord does work very well for one flash, but now that I use two SB700's on two brackets, I have to use the pop-up as a commander and fill at -1 stop.
    Always learning.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,182Member
    edited January 2016
    i wonder if an off camera wireless triggered SB5000 can act as a commander ... any one have an idea if it can?
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

Sign In or Register to comment.