Nikon D500

cab.in.boston

Better late than never? Nikon are finally getting around to replacing the D300(s), and it appears to be a pretty impressive set of specs.

New DX Flagship

NikonsandVstroms

My gear lust must be fading, I read the specs, got excited for a minute and then realized that it costs more than a D750 right now and that really the only potential game changer for me over the D7200 is the sensor/Expeed 5, so I hope they choose to use them for the D7300 and that my 7100 lasts until they come out with it.

But that's just me, I don't need 10 FPS and the D7100's AF has been very accurate in my work, I know there are others who this camera will tick the boxes of a bunch of features that weren't being offered by Nikon.

cab.in.boston

Pretty much agree with you. I don't like the smaller bodied cameras like the D7x00, though. This is released alongside the D5, similar to the D3/D300, so it brings a lot of the flagship performance to the DX line. I guess for someone shooting sports, this would tick boxes over the D750 and D7200. 153 AF points, 99 cross-type, 10 fps with a buffer up to 79 raw files (saw that number on another site... not actually finding buffer size on Nikon's site). I'm still shooting my D300 and mostly pretty happy with it (would like better high ISO and at least some more MP), but have no plans to upgrade until I can go FX. So this camera, while IMO it fills a hole in Nikon's lineup, isn't really that interesting to me. I am glad to see they're finally releasing it, though. It's been way too long.

ziggy53

cab.in.boston wrote: »

..., 10 fps with a buffer up to 79 raw files (saw that number on another site... not actually finding buffer size on Nikon's site). ...

According to one of the "Overview" tabs at http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/d500/

"10 fps up to 200 shots
High-speed continuous shooting at approx.
10 fps for up to 200 shots (14-bit lossless compressed RAW)"

Assuming that is correct information, wow, that would be nice to see. WTG Nikon.

ziggy53

Also, from the same site as my post above:

"New EXPEED 5 image-processing engine achieves
sensitivity up to ISO 51200,
expandable to Hi 5 (equivalent to ISO 1640000)"

... and the way I read that is that the Nikon D500 has a 'calibrated' maximum ISO of ISO 51200 (meaning that ISO 51200 on the D500 meets certain of Nikon's image quality standards for high-ISO noise, color fidelity and detail).

The Hi 5 setting is probably more for bragging rights, but I would still like to see examples of a properly exposed image at that setting. I mean, One million, Six Hundred and Forty thousand ISO, ... mommy!!! I can't imagine the camera can accurately or quickly autofocus under those conditions, image detail is probably mostly gone, and color is probably smeary and weak. Still, I wonder about potential uses ...

cab.in.boston

ISO 1.6 million is only for the weak D500. The new FX D5 goes up to 3.28 million, with a calibrated max of 102k. Yikes.

AceCo55

Already put in my pre-order!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had decided just last week that if the D400/500/9000 didn't come out with the D5 - or by March - I would buy the D7200 and then trade up to a D7300 in the future.
The D500 specs are just a game changer.
Now my D4 is a backup camera unless I specifically need the FX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Happy days for me - I have been waiting and just hanging by a thread that Nikon would eventually bring out this camera.

PhotoOp

I may buy the D500, as it should be great for BIF.

jmphotocraft

cab.in.boston wrote: »

Pretty much agree with you. I don't like the smaller bodied cameras like the D7x00, though. This is released alongside the D5, similar to the D3/D300, so it brings a lot of the flagship performance to the DX line. I guess for someone shooting sports, this would tick boxes over the D750 and D7200. 153 AF points, 99 cross-type, 10 fps with a buffer up to 79 raw files (saw that number on another site... not actually finding buffer size on Nikon's site). I'm still shooting my D300 and mostly pretty happy with it (would like better high ISO and at least some more MP), but have no plans to upgrade until I can go FX. So this camera, while IMO it fills a hole in Nikon's lineup, isn't really that interesting to me. I am glad to see they're finally releasing it, though. It's been way too long.

Be careful what you wish for when lusting for FX. Sports and wildlife will suddenly require either VERY expensive lenses, or compromise lenses. Take it from me, I went down that road with a 5D3 and 300/2.8IS. The IQ is amazing, but the size and weight are a drag, and the image take-home count takes a nosedive due to no zoom. I'm very happy now to be shooting sports with a 7D2 and a 70-200/2.8. 10fps is great. Nikon sports shooters who aren't paid to lug a 300/2.8 or 400/2.8 and multiple cameras should be all over this D500. Looks like a real winner.

cab.in.boston

jmphotocraft wrote: »

Be careful what you wish for when lusting for FX. Sports and wildlife will suddenly require either VERY expensive lenses, or compromise lenses. Take it from me, I went down that road with a 5D3 and 300/2.8IS. The IQ is amazing, but the size and weight are a drag, and the image take-home count takes a nosedive due to no zoom. I'm very happy now to be shooting sports with a 7D2 and a 70-200/2.8. 10fps is great. Nikon sports shooters who aren't paid to lug a 300/2.8 or 400/2.8 and multiple cameras should be all over this D500. Looks like a real winner.

Thanks for the advice, I completely understand what you're saying. However, I have next to no interest in wildlife, and the only "sports" I shoot is my own kids, so I'm not after fast frame rates or the reach of DX. However, I would like to upgrade my telephoto from my kit zoom to a 70-200, at least the f/4 version, which combined with the *much* better high ISO performance I'd get with a D810, would give me significantly better quality when shooting the kids in poorly lit school auditoria. Plus, with the 36 MP, I could shoot in DX crop and still have almost the same image size as this new D500, and noticeably larger than my current 12 MP. So I figure for my desired uses (mostly landscape and family stuff), the FX advantages outweigh the cons, while still being more than adequate for school gyms, personal shots in youth soccer, etc.

But I totally agree, for someone focused on sports or wildlife, the D500 looks fantastic. As a D300 owner, I'm just glad to see that Nikon *finally* continued the line.

jmphotocraft

Sure. I've shot my kids' sports with a 5D3 and a 70-200/2.8. It's do-able if you can be right on the sidelines and then wait for the action to come somewhat close. But in short order you'll be expected to get pics of everyone on the team. Still do-able with FX and 200mm on smaller-than-highschool fields, but it will take more games if not the whole season to get the whole team.

cab.in.boston

Perhaps. I have no problem saying that I'm just shooting my kids for fun and I've never been the slightest interested in selling photos (nor in taking photos of people unrelated to me, either, it's just not what I enjoy doing). But I'll burn that bridge when/if I ever get there. ��

DsrtVW

Well they finally did it, Been waiting to replace my D300 it is way over 300k clicks, I bought a D7000 nice camera but did not have AF or FPS or buffer, bought a D3 used great camera gave me FPS and bigger buffer. D750 to small for my hands D810 not for my style of shootingWas waiting for the D400 they give us a D500 I can live with that. My patience muscle has been well exercised, Thanks Nikon

NikonsandVstroms

Nikon posted a few D500 images, they were shot in JPEG and downsized so you can't get a true sense of what it can do but check out the third one down @ ISO 51,200:

http://www.nikon-image.com/products/slr/lineup/d500/sample.html

Mav

I find myself very tempted by this camera, having previously thought I was in the market to upgrade/switch to FF/D750 from my existing D7000. Re-examining my priorities, the improvements in autofocus, buffer and weather proofing, likely outweigh the image benefits from going FF.

It's a great time to be in the market for a new body

Matthew Saville

At first everyone seems to think, "Cool, a high-end DX body from Nikon. Okay, moving on..."

As soon as they compare it to the price of a D610 or D750, they lose interest real quick.

But, I find it a bit ironic. Mechanically speaking, (meaning, images and software-related features aside) the D500 is head and shoulders above the likes of the D610, on par with or slightly better than the D750, and also even on par with or slightly better than a few of the D810's mechanical specs.

Also, since it's DX, those D5 AF points are literally all over the viewfinder. All around, it's an incredible camera. Really, the only reason it gets looked down on is that folks have been influenced to believe that full-frame is the only acceptable "final destination" for a serious photographer.

Which, considering the amazing high ISO quality coming from the latest APS-C sensors, and the exotic faster-than-2.8 zooms and ultra-sharp f/1.4 primes, ...is a pretty unfortunate situation.

TLDR; I plan on getting a D500 to compliment / backup my D750 for wedding photography, and I bet there's at least a 50/50 chance I may even start using the D500 instead of the D750 unless I'm extremely strapped for light or DOF.

MomaZunk

I have my D500 on pre-order. I held it in my hand last week, and the grip feels just like the D750 which I love.

My deciding factors in order of importance are: the buffer really does go forever, ISO big step up from D7100, 4k video, 10 fps (for sports)

chasgroh2

...been using my D4 hooked to the bada$$ 200-400 f4 (or the 70-200 vII, if big stretch not needed) for a couple of years. I shoot pageantry (read: marching bands and indoor color guards) and the requirements for gear are right in line with *any* pro sports venue. So, I've been considering the bump to the D5 but now am re-assessing...could this D500 actually be *better* than my D4 when hooked to my SOA glass? Focus would be better (and focus, to me, is absolutely the most important aspect of this style of photography...given the great equipment) and, holy cow, the crop factor! I've seen comparisons, and image quality looks to be a bit better, too. Low light is the final issue; spec-wise it should be fine (stadium night lighting and dim gyms are the determiners here) so all I need now is some more comparisons and the trigger is pulled. Oh...and the cost differential. Wow.

ziggy53

I'm not sure that the D500 is better than the D4, but the combination of a Nikon D4 "and" a D500 is pretty formidable.

chasgroh2

ziggy53 wrote: »

I'm not sure that the D500 is better than the D4, but the combination of a Nikon D4 "and" a D500 is pretty formidable.

...yah, we'll see Ziggy...I'm gonna do it. Actually, adding to the D800 in the arsenal helps, too...if anything I can turn my D300 into an IR camera!

MomaZunk

I just picked up my D500 this afternoon, and here are some first impressions:
D500 is a bit larger than the D750, which I did not realize when I played with one at the launch event.
The grip is deep and grippy like the D750.
The viewfinder is brighter than my D750.
Features which I love right off the bat, as I have not had these in my previous camera bodies: dedicated AF-ON button, focus point joy stick, ISO button, 4 shooting and custom setting banks, back-lit buttons
I took a couple of pics in the dark of my dog at f1.8, 12800ISO, 1/10sec: focus was close without the focus assist, and the noise is not noticeable zoomed into my phone or the LCD.
tiff file format which is interesting.
First impressions of the snapbridge app is MUCH better than the WMU. It seems more responsive. I need to test it some more, but so far so good.

I plan to do some more testing at an evening baseball game tomorrow to see how it performs and get a better feel for the ISO performance.

MomaZunk

Update on Camera Raw 9.5 - It is nice that Adobe has RAW support as soon as the camera is released, BUT it is only available in Creative Cloud versions.
So if you are a hold out like me with LR 5 and PS6....I am being forced to the CC route to keep up with my new camera.....Arghhhh.

chasgroh2

MomaZunk wrote: »

Update on Camera Raw 9.5 - It is nice that Adobe has RAW support as soon as the camera is released, BUT it is only available in Creative Cloud versions.
So if you are a hold out like me with LR 5 and PS6....I am being forced to the CC route to keep up with my new camera.....Arghhhh.

...I'm sure you can buy the next LR/PS update(s) and you'll be fine, but, isn't that the point of the CC model? You get *all* updates and version changes included with your 10 bux a month. Boy, to me the numbers, and immediacy, crunch really well. I simply gave up my rarely-used Netflix DVD option and gave the money to Adobe (plus a couple of bux).

AceCo55

MomaZunk wrote: »

Update on Camera Raw 9.5 - It is nice that Adobe has RAW support as soon as the camera is released, BUT it is only available in Creative Cloud versions.
So if you are a hold out like me with LR 5 and PS6....I am being forced to the CC route to keep up with my new camera.....Arghhhh.

I'm in the same boat - I'm sticking with CS6 and converting all the RAW files to DNG when I pull them off the card. Yes, yes I know it's only $10/month but I'm quite happy with CS6 and I'm spending $0/month for it. I appreciate other people view CC differently ... and I hope those people also appreciate that not everyone wants/needs CC

I sure hope I get a phone call on Monday to say my D500 is ready to pick up - I'm first in the line at the biggest camera chain here (Adelaide, South Australia).

ziggy53

MomaZunk wrote: »

Update on Camera Raw 9.5 - It is nice that Adobe has RAW support as soon as the camera is released, BUT it is only available in Creative Cloud versions.
So if you are a hold out like me with LR 5 and PS6....I am being forced to the CC route to keep up with my new camera.....Arghhhh.

chasgroh2 wrote: »

...I'm sure you can buy the next LR/PS update(s) and you'll be fine, but, isn't that the point of the CC model? You get *all* updates and version changes included with your 10 bux a month. Boy, to me the numbers, and immediacy, crunch really well. I simply gave up my rarely-used Netflix DVD option and gave the money to Adobe (plus a couple of bux).

AceCo55 wrote: »

I'm in the same boat - I'm sticking with CS6 and converting all the RAW files to DNG when I pull them off the card. ...

Sadly, Adobe does not update Photoshop CS6 anymore, and CC is the only version supported and updated.

Lightroom (LR) is "possibly" going to have a version 7, but there haven't been any announcements. LR CC continues to be updated, of course.

Many folks are using LR as a method to open and convert RAW files and as a front-end for older Photoshop versions.

I am using Phase One, Capture One Pro (C1), as my Photoshop CS4 front-end. I also use Raw Therapee (freeware) as a RAW file converter and image processor. (I only mention these as options for those who want to continue to use older PS versions. Lots more options too, in addition to those mentioned by other users above.)

Ferguson

MomaZunk wrote: »

Update on Camera Raw 9.5 - It is nice that Adobe has RAW support as soon as the camera is released, BUT it is only available in Creative Cloud versions.
So if you are a hold out like me with LR 5 and PS6....I am being forced to the CC route to keep up with my new camera.....Arghhhh.

Just for perspective, if Adobe had never done CC, you would be "forced" to CS7 instead. Adobe has always drawn a line in the sand for functionality updates.

Icebear

Just Buy It (You know you want to)
It's been a long time since I was here. Thought I'd drop in and see what was going on. How'd this D500 thread segue into a Photoshop/Lightroom thread anyway??

I got my D500 an hour and a half before a night high-school lacrosse game. Fortunately I already had a charged battery, so without doing much tweaking, I headed out to see how the little beast would do. Well, let me just cut to MY bottom line: my D3s has been relegated to back-up sports body status. Holy cow! clap I have since shot another (rainy) lacrosse game under even crappier lights, and two middle-school musicals.

Real world (IMO): The D500 focuses more quickly, tracks as well, has about a stop better low-light IQ, and is a hell of a lot lighter than the D3s. The additional reach is certainly a plus too. My favorite feature so far?? The handy location for the ISO button.

I can't wait to try it out shooting dirt-bike hare scramble races in the woods. Seriously, if you don't need blazing fast focus, stupid-high frame rates, rugged, weather-sealed construction, intuitive controls, or jaw-dropping low-light performance, don't buy this camera. If you shoot sedate subjects in reasonably good light, a D7100 or D5300 (or whatever the latest iterations are) will keep you happy. If you need a pop-up flash, well . . . I am happy as a pig in poo. YMMV. Here are some sample images:

ISO 6400


ISO 12800


ISO 1600


ISO 3200


ISO 6400

chasgroh2

Icebear wrote: »

It's been a long time since I was here. Thought I'd drop in and see what was going on. How'd this D500 thread segue into a Photoshop/Lightroom thread anyway??

I got my D500 an hour and a half before a night high-school lacrosse game. Fortunately I already had a charged battery, so without doing much tweaking, I headed out to see how the little beast would do. Well, let me just cut to MY bottom line: my D3s has been relegated to back-up sports body status. Holy cow! clap I have since shot another (rainy) lacrosse game under even crappier lights, and two middle-school musicals.

Real world (IMO): The D500 focuses more quickly, tracks as well, has about a stop better low-light IQ, and is a hell of a lot lighter than the D3s. The additional reach is certainly a plus too. My favorite feature so far?? The handy location for the ISO button.

I can't wait to try it out shooting dirt-bike hare scramble races in the woods. Seriously, if you don't need blazing fast focus, stupid-high frame rates, rugged, weather-sealed construction, intuitive controls, or jaw-dropping low-light performance, don't buy this camera. If you shoot sedate subjects in reasonably good light, a D7100 or D5300 (or whatever the latest iterations are) will keep you happy. If you need a pop-up flash, well . . . I am happy as a pig in poo. YMMV. Here are some sam

...lookin' good! Can hardly wait to get that thing out to a day and night shooting on a football field filled with pageantry!

ziggy53

Icebear wrote: »

It's been a long time since I was here. Thought I'd drop in and see what was going on. How'd this D500 thread segue into a Photoshop/Lightroom thread anyway??

I got my D500 an hour and a half before a night high-school lacrosse game. Fortunately I already had a charged battery, so without doing much tweaking, I headed out to see how the little beast would do. Well, let me just cut to MY bottom line: my D3s has been relegated to back-up sports body status. Holy cow! clap I have since shot another (rainy) lacrosse game under even crappier lights, and two middle-school musicals.

Real world (IMO): The D500 focuses more quickly, tracks as well, has about a stop better low-light IQ, and is a hell of a lot lighter than the D3s. The additional reach is certainly a plus too. My favorite feature so far?? The handy location for the ISO button.

I can't wait to try it out shooting dirt-bike hare scramble races in the woods. Seriously, if you don't need blazing fast focus, stupid-high frame rates, rugged, weather-sealed construction, intuitive controls, or jaw-dropping low-light performance, don't buy this camera. If you shoot sedate subjects in reasonably good light, a D7100 or D5300 (or whatever the latest iterations are) will keep you happy. If you need a pop-up flash, well . . . I am happy as a pig in poo. YMMV. Here are some sample images:

ISO 6400

ISO 12800


ISO 1600


ISO 3200


ISO 6400

Hey, John. Great seeing you back here again.

I love the qualities of the D500 and your images certainly highlight and showcase the improvements and benefits. Tough lighting; great results! thumb