The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Nikon D500 is on the way

Swissblad

Well-known member
Thanks Rayyan - some more pix posted in Fun with Nikon thread......



All we need now is some good weather and time off.....:cool:
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member

(...) I should say that the D500 with the 300mm f4.0 PF make a dream team (...)



Good to hear, I do have the - now let me see, what was the name - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR N - or something like that .-)

Indeed a sweet little optic

and now combined with 'the right camera'
at least until the FX versions of the new generation compact pro DSLRs are released
think D700 / D750 successor, and D810 successor - (depending on 'speed vs resolution' and 'AA filter' preferences)



©lick for actual pixels


© • Nikon D500 • AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR • 1/800 sec. at f/4 ISO 800 • Capture One Pro
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Nikon D500 + AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR



©lick for actual pixels


© • Nikon D500 • AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR • 1/1600 sec. at f/4 ISO 200 • Capture NX-D
 

stngoldberg

Well-known member
The para surfers were probably a mile away
The D500 with the 200-500mm lens with the 1.4 extender at f8, 1,2500 sec, iso at 1000
Stanley
 
Last edited:

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Re: Nikon D500 + AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR


©lick for actual pixels


© • Nikon D500 • AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR • 1/1600 sec. at f/4 ISO 200 • Capture NX-D
Steen,

congratulations on this marvelous camera and lens, just a very perfect approach for wildlife and anything requiring fast and precise AF.

Looking for more pictures :thumbs:

Peter
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
What Nikon is the D500 supposed to replace? $1999 seems pretty high for not being full frame
It replaces the D300/D300s. The price is very close to what those cameras were at launch, and less than a third of what the D2Xs, not full frame either, was 10 years ago. This is a camera that "outshoots" any current Nikon model except the D5 when used for sports and action. In addition it offers 50% more reach than the D5.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
A D5, $6,496.95 seems pretty high for full frame with the same SOTA autofocus :eek:
It's important to realise that the high price of the D5 is not so much due to the larger sensor. The D2X was relatively speaking more expensive than any of the FX models that followed it except for the D3X, which was rather exotic technology when it was launched. There are other factors that contribute to the higher price as well:

- A larger, more complicated and stronger body
- More physical buttons and switches
- Much lower production numbers
- Electronics that to a certain degree is made for the "one digit" model only
- Production in Japan instead of Thailand
- A much more expensive battery and charger made in much smaller numbers too

If I were a still sports shooter, I would have preferred the D500 sensor in the D5 body, a camera similar to the D2X, to be able to use smaller, lighter telephoto lenses. While the absurd high ISO capabilities of the D5 are great, and sometimes even needed, lighter gear would extend the time I would be able or willing to carry my gear. That extra time is sometimes more important than being able to shoot beyond darkness.

Also, the crop factor would often give me an extra aperture stop, compensating for some of the high ISO deficiency of the D500. A 200 mm f/2 becomes the equivalent of a 300 mm f/2, while with a D5, I would have to use a 300mm f/2.8 to get the same reach. Same thing with 400 mm f/2.8 vs. 600 mm f/4, and with zoom lenses, the difference is often even more radical.
 

ChrisLivsey

New member
It's important to realise that the high price of the D5 is not so much due to the larger sensor.
You make very valid points.
I have "moved" (not moved I still own it) from the D3 to the D500, the D2H is retired.
Yes I miss the single digit feel, the D500 good as it is, and it is very good, is still not a single digit body. They have a je ne sais quoi and for all the reasons you quote I would have it except for my applications the D500, with the same autofocus as I said, would allow me to own two bodies with change. I don't rant against the pricing model, it is what it is, primarily the relatively small market for the flagship but it does have its disadvantages primarily of bulk and weight, after cost. Despite their similarities the D5 and D500 are different market segments and I don't see why, to revert to the question, why it needs to be perceived as replacing anything.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
The D5 is simply a FF Pro body of 2016 - this is that simple. Price and function and haptic result from this.

The D500 is a very capable attempt from Nikon to stay relevant in the high end APSC sports/action/wildlife market. And they had done a great job with that.

For me the D5 is simply too big, heavy and also expensive, given the fact that in 2 years from now a new model will replace it. Too much waste of money for what I do and need.

The D500 is in a high price range and much better suited for my sports/action and wildlife ambitions. And costs a fraction of the D5. This makes decisions pretty simple.
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Nikon D500 + AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR


Steen,
congratulations on this marvelous camera and lens, just a very perfect approach for wildlife and anything requiring fast and precise AF.
Looking for more pictures :thumbs:
Peter

Thanks a lot, Peter :thumbup:
The D500 works quite nicely in combination with the AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF, that I already had.
For some reason my D610 didn't work all that well with the 300mm tele, the results usually seemed a bit blurry.
So my considerations were, should I sell off the 300mm lens or should I try it in combination with another body.
And in that case which camera body ?

Would it make any difference to switch to the D750 which is supposed to have a superior autofocus performance compared to the D610 ?
Or would I be better off switching to the new D500 without a blurring filter and with higher pixel density ?
I ended up selling the D610 in order to partially fund the D500 purchase, and fortunately this new camera works very well with the tele lens as well as with my macro lens (a Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar 100mm f/2).

So - to answer Doug's question - in my case the new APS-C sensor based D500 replaced my old 24x36mm sensor based D610.
Weird ? To some extent, yes. And I need to admit that I already miss having a 'full-frame' camera along with my new D500 APS-C camera. The DX camera for tele and macro, and an FX camera for everything else.
Hopefully I can afford the D700 / D750 successor when it is released at some point next year or so.
(By the way, I agree that the price level seems rather hefty for the D500 as an APS-C camera, though I believe that Jorgen is right that sensor size actually doesn't need to matter all that much pricewise).

Here's another D500 + 300mm shot, the picture shown here is a 100 % crop, but if you click on it you can see the entire frame.
The bird is a juvenile Common Redstart (Phoenicurus phoenicurus).
It illustrates that 300mm is basically too short for bird photography, but the 300mm tele was all I could afford among the tele primes.
For the wildlife purpose the perceived extra 'reach' of the APS-C sensor helps to some extent.



A 100 % crop -- ©lick to get the entire frame


© • Nikon D500 • AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR • 1/1250 sec. at f/4 ISO 100 • Capture NX-D
 

Swissblad

Well-known member
My Sentiments echo those of Steen - the D500 is a terrific dx camera - and coupled with the lightweight 300mm PF Lens, has become our take everywhere P&S combination.
It has also breathed new life into our Tamron 90mm Macro.......
For wide angle Landscape of architectural work - the best Option remains an FX Body.

And... Great as it is... The D500 cannot compare with a D5!


:toocool:
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Nikon D500 + AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR


(...) congratulations on this marvelous camera and lens, just a very perfect approach for wildlife and anything requiring fast and precise AF (...)

Peter, before you or anybody else rush out and buy this lens I want to add that I personally think that perhaps the AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR lacks a bit of contrast.
At least with this lens I now and then find myself adding a tad of contrast in post processing (just about 10 %), something I cannot remember having done before.
Just to keep in mind if considering buying the 300mm (or even better: try it before you buy it).
Don't get me wrong, I like the lens a lot now that it works well for me, I just wanted to share this perceived detail with the rest of you.

@ Swissblad:
Swiss, have you noticed a slight lack of contrast with the 300mm f/4E PF, or is it just me imagining things, or is it perhaps simply a common thing with tele lenses ?
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Re: Nikon D500 + AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR

Peter, before you or anybody else rush out and buy this lens I want to add that I personally think that perhaps the AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4E PF ED VR lacks a bit of contrast.
At least with this lens I now and then find myself adding a tad of contrast in post processing (just about 10 %), something I cannot remember having done before.
Just to keep in mind if considering buying the 300mm (or even better: try it before you buy it).
Don't get me wrong, I like the lens a lot now that it works well for me, I just wanted to share this perceived detail with the rest of you.

@ Swissblad:
Swiss, have you noticed a slight lack of contrast with the 300mm f/4E PF, or is it just me imagining things, or is it perhaps simply a common thing with tele lenses ?
Many thanks Steen for this update!

My next Nikkor lens will anyway be a zoom for wildlife - either the 200-500 to the 80-400, which is IMHO the more practical choice anyway.

Only then I would go for a fixed focal length and then the 300mm f/4E PF is high on my wish list.

Enjoy your new camera!
 
Top