New D5 General Discussion Thread

Ironheart

It is now clear that Nikon has purposefully traded-off base DR performance for better DR at higher ISO. This is because the intended use of a D5 is high-speed action/sports/BIF photography. How many times do you want to push past 1/1000th of a second, stop down to f/5.6 or even f/8 (or are already there with big guns and TCs), and are crying because the light is dropping and you are already at ISO 6400? Fear no more, the D5 is just getting into the sweet spot. 12800? 25600? Meh, no prob. Hey, maybe I can reach for 1/4000th now and really stop the action, even as the light falls.

Want 14 stops of glorious DR at ISO 50? Get yerself a D810. Or do HDR. Or both.

Fatcharlie

autofocus said:

I'm using my D4 batteries with my D5 so, yes sir, they work..

Thank you for confirming that autofocus, my D4 is just a few clicks away from hitting the 300K mark, so am considering the upgrade to D5. No the DXO numbers does not bother me.

Can one of the experts here explain what a poor dynamic range at low ISO would translate into in layman terms?

Does it mean the colors in the image will be bland? flat? at a certain low ISO whereas the same image with same settings will be richer more vibrant in color on a 810?

Ironheart

It's not poor by any means. It's still better than Canon. It's just not as great (by less than a stop) as the D4 and D810, arguably some of the best cameras on the market. You will never see it in real-life, only on a test chart with computer analytics on the back-end. Ignore the science wienies (including me) when we are making comparisons, as we're well off in the weeds of measuring stuff that hardly matters for the final result. We just like arguing over single digit percentage differences

donaldejose

Fatcharlie: someone moving from a D4 to a D5 should answer. However, this is something to consider. DxOMark names dynamic range "landscape" because it is most important in landscape images. DxOMark states: "A value of 12 EV is excellent with differences below 0.5 EV usually not noticeable." The D5 landscape rating by DxOMark is 12.3 EV. Therefore, the D5 dynamic range is excellent according to DxOMark. The D4 has a landscape rating of 13.1 EV; which is slightly more excellent. Thus, the D5 has a slight lost of dynamic range. This loss is 0.8 EV. As DxOMark admits such a difference would be hardly noticeable. Look at this graphic published by DxOMark to provide more detail as to what they say.



You will note the slight drop in dynamic range occurs between ISO 100 and ISO 800. If you are buying a D5 to shoot in this ISO range you can stay with a D4s as far as dynamic range is concerned. However, from ISO 1600 to ISO 51,200 the D5 has more dynamic range than the D4s. People buying a D4 or D5 are probably going to be using telephoto lenses and shooing at high ISO to stop people or animals from moving. In this use the D5 will be superior in dynamic range not to mention better auto focusing and more fps. If people are buying a Nikon body to shoot as ISO 100 and they don't need fast AF or fast fps they may well be better off with a D810 or even a D750 because both have better dynamic range at ISO 100. Hope that helps. But the best experience will be from someone shooting a D4s now and switching to a D5. They can tell you what they see and if you really can see a difference.

Fatcharlie

Thanks Ironheart & donaldejose that was very helpful.

@autofocus

I was looking at photo a day thread and noticed that you have both the camera's which I have D810, D4; and the two cameras I am considering D500 and D5.

My D810 is good for a year or so, but my D4 is nearing end of its life. So as a action photog my obvious choice to upgrade is a D5.

But just wanted to know from an owner on how the D5 is working out for you in lieu of D4 situations?

Secondly in your opinion as an actual user, where do you stop using D500 and pick up the D5 or vice-versa? (also, have you tried the flicker reduction feature?)

autofocus

@Fatcharlie

I've shot several motocross events with the D4 and it's an exceptional camera as you know. My D4 is still a fantastic camera and continues in service. My desire to pick up the D5 was the hope for a lower light capability when shooting on less than stellar days (overcast and such) and/or when events start early morning, extend to late evening. Supercross, (which I wasn't able to shoot this year) is for the most part in dim stadiums and presents a problem with shutter speed and AF acquisition. My testing so far shows at a local MX track shooting riders practicing reveals a marked improvement over the D4 for this specific shooting. Pushing the ISO to 12800 in evening light allowed 1/2500th which I need to freeze motion. The D4 struggled at times with AF and the images (JPG) were much cleaner from the D5. Less difference in noise when looking at the RAW files but still obvious. AF was the real discriminator.

I hadn't planned to buy the D500 but started thinking about the corp factor and ability to gain a bit of reach on my tele lenses. As crazy as this sounds I thought what the heck, price is reasonable and my 200 becomes a 300, 400 a 600 and with the AF, 10 FPS it makes a nice second camera for some events. I have not experimented with the flicker reduction yet. Maybe next month when I have a chance to shoot a grandson's wrestling event in a high school gym. That should provide decent test.

I typically carry two cameras on the Black Rapid yeti strap so now i have the ability to choose between a D5/D4 or D5/D500 or D4/D500 set up.

I will say I've enjoyed carrying the D500 around this last week with the Sigma 35 Art attached. Makes a great have along rig and even with the weight of the Sigma it's pretty light and compact. It's a joy to shoot and so far I've experienced no problems with the camera and images are exceptional.

I don't know if any of this helps or if I even answered your question. Not trying to sell anyone on either camera. They work for me and I can see an improvement for my needs.

Total disclosure: I'm not a professional just an avid hobbyist that from time to time is fortunate to shoot some exciting events.

Golf007sd

Nice feed back Auto...cheers

Fatcharlie

Thanks autofocus, can't complain about D4 its already a great low light camera. D5 will take it up a notch for those deary rainy days, low cast dawn and dusk events. I look forward to your D500 flicker reduction try outs next month, wrestling is tough to shoot mostly as it takes place low on the mat. I guess you lay down on your tummy to take those shots.

Msmoto

I need to avoid reading these threads....may suggest to me to replace my D4 with a D5, or maybe just add to my kit.... LOL

BVS

DXO sensor scores for D5 are up. Somehow, inconceivably, it scored lower in ISO than D4S... what!?

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D5-sensor-review-A-worthy-successor

Ironheart

One point on the overall DxO scale is insignificant. The camera is optimized for high-ISO/high-speed photography. The article is quite informative and specific as to how the various Nikon and Canon high-end cameras compare.

donaldejose

BVS: Dynamic range is only lower at low ISO. It is higher at high ISO. Try this to see.

1. Go to this page http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm
2. Click on D4s to see its dynamic range across the ISO range
3. Click on D5 to see its dynamic range across the ISO range
4. Click on D810 to see its dynamic range across the ISO range

Conclusion:
1. If you are shooting at 64 to 100 to 200 ISO use the D810
2. If you are shooting at 3200 to 204,800 ISO use the D5
3. See, is is not "lower in ISO than the D4s." It is a bit lower at low ISO and a bit higher at high ISO. Nikon has maximized the higher ISO range which is where this sports, low light, and high movement camera will be used.

If you want to see something interesting click on the D600 to add it to the chart. You will find that at ISO 100 to 400 the D600 which you can purchase now for less than $1,000 has better dynamic range than the $6,500 D5! So if you are shooting slow at low ISO use a D600 instead of a D5.

Msmoto

I would be reluctant to accept test results which suggest the D600 has more dynamic range than a D5. This would, IMO, need to be seen to be believed. Often the testing results are based upon subjective laboratory results, and in the real world, often we see something different.

But, if someone finds the D600 desirable, for about 1/6th the price of a D5, go for it. This may be one of the best values, provided the shutter oil issue is not present.

donaldejose

Good point! People fuss and worry over small differences seen on a graph drawn from some sort of "test results" when I look at the real world photos and don't see anything to complain about. For example, Moose Peterson uses a D5 at low ISO and he has no complaints about dynamic range. http://www.moosepeterson.com/blog/2016/06/01/nikon-d5-vid/

autofocus

Well, I was over at CR and it seems the new 1dxmkii is experiencing some problems. So, it's not just a Nikon thing. There are a few folks that aren't happy. My D5 seems ok so far. I haven't had any problems yet.

MegapixelSchnitzel

starralazn said:

Idk what you're getting at. It's a camera, not a video camera. A camera with excellent stills shooting ergonomics, and the added capability to take some minor film footage.

Thank you. When the D5P comes out, then you'll be able to make phone calls and skype while shooting the sports event, too.

MegapixelSchnitzel

donaldejose said:

Good point! People fuss and worry over small differences seen on a graph drawn from some sort of "test results" when I look at the real world photos and don't see anything to complain about. For example, Moose Peterson uses a D5 at low ISO and he has no complaints about dynamic range. http://www.moosepeterson.com/blog/2016/06/01/nikon-d5-vid/

Moose Peterson should be disregarded because he has fat fingers and can't even get the XQD cards out of his camera. No, no, just kidding. Moose Peterson could use a Polaroid SX-70 and make money out of it - and that really does have the dynamic range of a fax machine. And any time Moose Peterson needs anything above ISO 400, he's asleep.

HockeyMan

Apologies for necro bumping this thread, but I wasn't sure whether to create a new thread or use this one since the admins generally want us to use an existing thread.

I may be on the market for a new body since my D800 has seen better days. I have over 150k shots on it, so I've used it very well. I could just go D850, but I shoot gymnastics the most, so I need low light with a high shutter speed, which is basically, the D5. The D800 has worked wonders for me over the years, but at almost every meet I go to, I wish I could have gotten a faster sequence during a tumbling pass.

Anyway, to my point, the D5 is now a "wait" in the Nikon buying guide page. I know the Winter / Summer Olympics were traditionally the times that Nikon released new full frame pro bodies, but the Olympics have come and gone, and it looks like there will be no D5s or D6 in the near future. Should I really wait if I'm buying in the next 3 months? I did rent a D850 and it's a seriously great camera. But the FPS is not in D5 territory.

So spend my money for me as you guys are wonderful at doing. Or just some sage advice would be welcome.

Ton14

D600 with the D5 AF, yess ...

spraynpray

Hockeyman, there's always the D500? I know some people have both and don't use the D5 now...

donaldejose

Hockyman: you can get the battery grip, put the bigger battery in it and the D850 will shoot at 9 fps. The D500 shoots at 10fps without a battery grip. The D5 shoots at 12 fps. The D4s was just under 11 fps. Nikon mirrorless, out this year, may shoot much faster as the old Nikon 1 could shoot 60 fps.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWrbTfiBaOA
www.youtube.com/watch?v=H22Jwb-6tas

retread

I once was employed manufacturing gymnastics equipment. I think I would enjoy photographing a gymnastics computation. I enjoy doing other sports with my D500. I often looked at the posters they had and wondered if I could get that good of a shot.

WestEndFoto

HockeyMan said:

Apologies for necro bumping this thread, but I wasn't sure whether to create a new thread or use this one since the admins generally want us to use an existing thread.

I may be on the market for a new body since my D800 has seen better days. I have over 150k shots on it, so I've used it very well. I could just go D850, but I shoot gymnastics the most, so I need low light with a high shutter speed, which is basically, the D5. The D800 has worked wonders for me over the years, but at almost every meet I go to, I wish I could have gotten a faster sequence during a tumbling pass.

Anyway, to my point, the D5 is now a "wait" in the Nikon buying guide page. I know the Winter / Summer Olympics were traditionally the times that Nikon released new full frame pro bodies, but the Olympics have come and gone, and it looks like there will be no D5s or D6 in the near future. Should I really wait if I'm buying in the next 3 months? I did rent a D850 and it's a seriously great camera. But the FPS is not in D5 territory.

So spend my money for me as you guys are wonderful at doing. Or just some sage advice would be welcome.

I am shooting gymnastics on Sunday with my D850 and battery grip at 9fps. I will tell you how it went.

HockeyMan

So how did it go, @WestEndPhoto?

WestEndFoto

HockeyMan said:

So how did it go, @WestEndPhoto?

Interesting. I was mostly shooting with flash, but I shot enough available light to appreciate the demands placed on gear and ISO. One thing is for sure, 1/500s is perhaps OK for the torso with some of those fast moves, but the fast moving extremities are still going to be blurry. You will want to be about 1/3000s or even faster if you want to freeze that.

To that end, the lens speed trumps everything. Bring 1.4 lenses and if you say they are too expensive, then why are you thinking a D5 over a D850 with grip. Once you have your f/1.4 lenses, then fps is the most important. However, I was shooting using flash on my D800 at 9 fps and the guy next to me was shooting the same with a D5. I know that you can't use flash, but I did get to compare his sequences to mine.

The extra 3fps does make a difference, but in ten minutes of shooting (doing our kind) I was getting much more than half the great shots that he was getting. The moral of that story is if you are standing their shooting one gymnastics sequence after which everyone goes home, then use a D5. If you are at an event and you simply want a collection of good shots, then a D850 is more than enough and I can understand how you got good shots even with your D800 (which is currently my backup camera).

What I was really after was this:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/westendfoto/26777223858/in/dateposted/

This shot was taken at ISO 100, f/5.6 at 1/250sec with my 105 1.4E. The shutter speed is misleading, however. That is just the maximum synch speed with my D850. As you can appreciate this, I was in a gym that was lit like a typical gym. The background was various pieces of equipment and if I was at ISO 50,000 or something I would have a decent exposure and you would see all that. Remember that I am at f/5.6.

This alone should illustrate the challenges of shooting available light. This is like shooting with a superzoom at a speed STILL to slow to freeze motion and at ISO 100, everything is black. Still......

I froze the motion with flash duration. The flash duration on the two heads I was using was faster than 1/10,000 sec for t 0.5 and faster than 1/5,000 sec for t 1.0. They were about 30 feet behind the gymnast, left and right, about 18 feet off the floor. Each flash was flagged to avoid flair.

Now, has anybody said, "Wait a minute, he said that he was shooting at 9fps and his buddy was shooting at 12 fps. This doesn't add up! Most of his images must have been black."

If you know studio lighting and were paying attention you certainly did.

The thing is, if you want a shorter flash duration, you have to turn the power down. Now that will mean that the recycle time is shorter and maybe the power pack can keep up with 12 fps, but those flashes are 30 feet away, so how do you turn the power down that much and still get an exposure.

The $10,000 Profoto D4s that I am used to using cannot do that. I had to rent this little puppy:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1338608-REG/broncolor_b_31_047_07_scoro_3200s_wifi.html

Now it says that it can do 10 fps at full power (wow!) but remember I had two heads, so that is only 5 fps. But I had it turned down 2 or 3 stops (or maybe 4) from full power and it was doing what a Profoto D4 cannot do without even breathing hard.

Now I don't see myself spending $20k plus for all that gear, but it only cost a little more than $200 to rent it for a day.

That was quite an experience.