lexdiamonnyc wrote:
this is the body the D750 should've had! makes me think that a true D700 successor might be in the works.
Hey now, I'm quite fond of the D750's body- it is seriously light and compact, yet with great handling!
But I can definitely see Nikon putting the D5 sensor into this body to make a D700 successor too, and it could sit quite well as a higher-end alternative to the D750, while providing a faster frame-rate/high-ISO alternative to the D810 .
arbitrage wrote:
That seems like an odd move....would have thought CF and SD would make more sense for a $2000 camera. The more odd move is producing a D5 with dual CF....move on to the new standard or just forget about it....
D5 comes with either two CF or XQD.
The D500 has a UHS-2 SD slot.
arbitrage wrote:
That seems like an odd move....would have thought CF and SD would make more sense for a $2000 camera. The more odd move is producing a D5 with dual CF....move on to the new standard or just forget about it....
Well even the $3000+ D810 has 1CF and 1 SD.
Hard to say if its a space saving move, or a compromise - those moving from lesser cameras can keep their SD cards, and those sharing with a D4 and D5 can keep their XQD's.
XQD is cheaper than CFast, so I think a migration to XQD is logical. Nikon also collaborated with Sony and Sandisk when XQD was developed, so they are somewhat invested.
I actually really like SD cards, I wouldn't be upset if they just had dual SD.
Thankfully cards aren't a big deal these days, unless you have unusual requirements, they are relatively inexpensive.
technic wrote:
Agree, the 7D2 looks technologically outdated compared to the D500 on many points. Which doesn't guarantee the D500 takes better pictures, but for e.g. wildlife shooters having a tilt screen and the option of good quality video will be a nice bonus. However, the 7D2 isn't the only recent camera with 'issues' so lets hope it has mature technology right out of the gate.
Not really- the 7D II is just more focused. It doesn't have a tilt or touch screen, sure, but neither of those are terribly useful for an action body, and both are more liable to get damaged with heavy use. Canon's touch and tilt tech is top notch, so it's literally a choice, and something that Nikon thought might better differentiate the D500 in the market.
And note that the 7D II has very good live-view AF, both for stills and for video; this is something that Nikon would have to have improved over previous cameras for their tilt-screen to be of real use, as you don't get that fancy D5 AF system when using the screen .
Steve Perry wrote:
Shhh. Don't tell Nikon but may have just lost a D5 sale from me - I think this D500 is exactly what I want for wildlife. Not saying a D5 is out of the picture for sure, but I'll be getting a D500 first. Very exciting and surprising.
The D500will be bought here, certain.
The D5, well I have a D4S.
Then again there is XMAS 2016.
johnctharp wrote:
Hey now, I'm quite fond of the D750's body- it is seriously light and compact, yet with great handling!
But I can definitely see Nikon putting the D5 sensor into this body to make a D700 successor too, and it could sit quite well as a higher-end alternative to the D750, while providing a faster frame-rate/high-ISO alternative to the D810 .
Personally I'd rather see a D750 with the new Sony 42MP sensor and a bit faster pipeline, enabling competitive crop mode performance (top quality FF and APS-C performance in one relatively compact/light body). This would also provide a more obvious distance from the D610 spec.
This makes a lot of sense; SD cards were shunned in the D300-era as they were too small and too slow for professional shooting, but flash technology has evolved by orders of magnitude since then; at worst, SD cards themselves are more fragile, which is what would make XQD a more likely choice in a pro-focused body, but as those cards are an order of magnitude more expensive and provide only greater durability as their benefit, the SD card choice fits for the D500.
CanadaMark wrote:
Well even the $3000+ D810 has 1CF and 1 SD.
Hard to say if its a space saving move, or a compromise - those moving from lesser cameras can keep their SD cards, and those sharing with a D4 and D5 can keep their XQD's.
XQD is cheaper than CFast, so I think a migration to XQD is logical. Nikon also collaborated with Sony and Sandisk when XQD was developed, so they are somewhat invested.
Thankfully cards aren't a big deal these days, unless you have unusual requirements, they are relatively inexpensive.
technic wrote:
Personally I'd rather see a D750 with the new Sony 42MP sensor and a bit faster pipeline, enabling competitive crop mode performance (top quality FF and APS-C performance in one relatively compact/light body). This would also provide a more obvious distance from the D610 spec.
If Nikon intends to replace the D610, they'll likely have to do something of the sort; the 'D620' may become a drop-in D750 replacement, and the 'D760' may become a 'baby-D810' with the new 42MP Exmor.
Though hopefully Nikon will have their VR issues with lighter bodies figured out; it's really unfortunate to have seen problems with the D750 + 300/4E PF combination, and an upgrade in resolution would only make that problem appear worse!
johnctharp wrote:
Damn, this Canon shooter is drooling- hopefully they put it in the D750's body! After having shot Canon's lower-semipro's, the awkwardness that is the D7200's ergonomics just wouldn't fly .
No they did not put in a D750 body, it is in a Pro-Dx body.
The 4K video, HDMI uncompressed.
There is also a VR on the body itself, like the Sony's.
Very fast speed and solid construction.
AF seems to be just amazing as well.
Connectivity and also touch screen with movable screen.
I don't usually do that, but I'll pre-order it as soon as it's available.
D7200 is a great body, I think I'll keep it, but this one seems to be in a different league.
johnctharp wrote:
Not really- the 7D II is just more focused. It doesn't have a tilt or touch screen, sure, but neither of those are terribly useful for an action body, and both are more liable to get damaged with heavy use. Canon's touch and tilt tech is top notch, so it's literally a choice, and something that Nikon thought might better differentiate the D500 in the market.
As I was trying to say, the D500 really wins on spec but that doesn't mean it takes better pictures. Practice will show if the 'more focused' approach of the 7D2 works better for 'action'. Personally I like the D500 concept much better (assuming it works as promised).
For some people 'action' is just what the subject does, that doesn't mean you have to go to war with your camera and have impact damage risk with every shot and I definitely see some nice use for a tilt screen in a camera that can shoot fast. I wouldn't worry about damaging a tilt screen, having used them on several previous cameras - touch screens are possibly a bit more prone to trouble, I hope they have made the right decisions there.
Some mixed info out there....DPR says no to pop up flash, nikon site says yes. DPR says xqd plus sd slots, others say 2 sd slots.
I have a d810 and a d750 now...but would consider the d500 to replace the d750 if the iq and low light performance check out. I've never really bought off on the 'extra reach' of a dx sensor since it really is only a narrower fov that you get for cropping, but as others have said this could be a really good dedicated wildlife camera.
Personally I'd be disappointed to see xqd slot and no on board flash..the former is expensive and requires a seperate reader, and the latter just flat out comes in handy sometimes when you don't want to, or don't have time to, strap on a 'real' flash.
Looks like the D500 just wipes the floor with with 7DII, and this is coming from a Canon shooter. I don't know any other reason not to get the D500 if I shoot crop/wildlife unless you're already heavily invested in glass.
raboof wrote:
Supposed to be a D400 but bumped the name to D500 so no one will expect another generation of its kind?
I think they just skipped the D400 as a name since the number 4 I believe is unlucky or disliked in Japan. There's a reason why Panasonic for m4/3 cameras skipped the Panasonic naming the camera after the Panasonic GF3, the GF4 going from the GF3 directly to the GF5.
.
.