If the IQ is anything close to the D7200, I'm a happy camper. I bought mine
(Tue del. out West) for the AF and 10 fps. Love the D7200 and will hang on to it.
More rodeo and BIF action keepers with the D500?? has me chompin' at da bit.
morrismike wrote:
I wonder if Nikon knows about that?
I'm sure they do - or will very soon. And I doubt there is much they can do about it. Amazon will argue that they aren't the sellers, rather it is one of their merchants - "America's Cameras" and I doubt Nikon would want to cut Amazon off. B&H would seem to have an understanding with Nikon about being able to sell grey market gear while being an authorized dealer. I imagine the argument there is that it is a service to their overseas customers but of course US resident can buy the grey gear too.
I've noticed in the past that car dealers have different ways to skin this particular cat depending on the terms of their dealer agreement. Here, when the "market price" of a particular Honda model has been above the sticker price the local dealer has tacked on an extra $1,500 to $5,000 "Additional Dealer Mark up" - sometimes in addition to "fabric protection" etc.
On the other hand BMW seems to take a dim view of that practice so when Minis were hot I remember a local dealer having more "used" Minis in stock than new. Most with less than 500 miles on the clock. The used Minis were all roughly $5k more than a new one. Of course the dealership had to register them and pay the tax to make them "used".
Steve Perry wrote:
After watching Fro and looking around, it seems to me that there is a lot of rationalization going on. There's not really much in the way of controlled comparisons happening, aside from the images I posted. Just a lot of guys saying how great it is and how it's the "best ever" with no real proof to back it up. (Again, at least as far as I've seen)
I understand, because I wanted to believe it was going be WAY better, but the truth is, it's really close to the D7200. It's interesting how the fan boy YT people aren't doing controlled comparisons. I think DPreview will probably get their D500 ISO tests up in the next few days and DXO in the near future. I think we're going to see the D500 is roughly the same performance as the D7200 when compared at the same size - cuz that's what I'm seeing in my tests. Even when compared at their native sizes, it's pretty darn close.
Which is fine by me, I like the D7200 and I appreciate the improvements the D500 brings to the table ...Show more →
If the enthusiastic, early-adopter reports of High ISO and AF performance for each new generation of camera were to believed then current cameras would be able to shoot cleanly at ISO 10 million and would have an AF hit rate approaching 150%
Thanks a lot for your efforts, Steve, it's a valuable help for our investigations and decisions.
To my eye it seems like D7200 has substantially more vibrant (lively, fresh, vital, sparkling) colors than D500 straight out of the camera (especially visible in the orange and red colors).
The D500 colors appear more dull - at least to my eye.
Can you confirm this from other comparison shots ?
By the way, when I try to download your sample RAW files I get this error message:
"Error (429) This account's link is generating too much traffic and have been temporarily disabled!"
It has been like that for the last two days, any chance you could make the RAW files available from a more powerful source ?
I rarely ever show my unprocessed images, but I was very happy with how good ISO 4000 looked in good light. The test shots at the beginning of this thread were taken in low light, even though they don't look it. This was from this AM at ISO 4000.
The first is the overall photo with some basic LR edits. Next it a 100% crop showing how ISO 4000 can look with LR's noise reduction and some careful resharpening of the image (using masking in LR). To me, it looks like it take NR pretty darn well. I wouldn't hesitate to print this for someone.
The final image is without the NR, still pretty good.
By the way, when I try to download your sample RAW files I get this error message:
"Error (429) This account's link is generating too much traffic and have been temporarily disabled!"
It has been like that for the last two days, any chance you could make the RAW files available from a more powerful source ?
The link works again, and I have now downloaded the .zip file with the RAW samples.
Thanks a lot, Steve, much appreciated
Steve Perry wrote:
OK, here's a real world shot for you.
I rarely ever show my unprocessed images, but I was very happy with how good ISO 4000 looked in good light. The test shots at the beginning of this thread were taken in low light, even though they don't look it. This was from this AM at ISO 4000.
The first is the overall photo with some basic LR edits. Next it a 100% crop showing how ISO 4000 can look with LR's noise reduction and some careful resharpening of the image (using masking in LR). To me, it looks like it take NR pretty darn well. I wouldn't hesitate to print this for someone.
The final image is without the NR, still pretty good. ...Show more →
Steve, I would appreciate your views on how this compares to shooting your D810 in DX mode. Thanks in advance.
bobmcg wrote:
Steve, I would appreciate your views on how this compares to shooting your D810 in DX mode. Thanks in advance.
---------------------------------------------
m.sommers00 wrote:
x2...wondering if I can justify a wildlife-only camera attached to my Sigma sport....
After shooting birds yesterday, I was already trying to tell myself how nice 10FPS would be
It's not even close - the D500 is in another league.
Not only is the AF faster, the points go all the way across the DX area, so that's pretty sweet. The AF though is just far more tenacious and about the only time it misses is when I don't do my job. It's definitely a step up.
10 FPS is a nice change from the 6 that the D810 does in DX mode (OK, 7 if you have a grip). 4 more opportunities in every burst to get the best shot. I got an avocet with it's beak perfectly open tonight at 10 FPS - only ONE frame captured the moment, the one before and after missed it.
It's also 21MP vs 16MP, so there's more resolution for printing / room for cropping.
As far as noise, I think it's close if you have the D810 in DX mode. Not sure though, I haven't tested that one.
Ergonomically, I think it's better for action. The little joystick makes a huge difference when you need to move the AF point in a hurry, more so than you might expect.
The dedicated DX viewfinder is nice as well - beats concentrating on the small DX area in the D810 - although sometimes it is nice to see what's outside of the frame before you shoot with the 810 in crop mode.
All that said, if you are within full frame range and don't need the FPS, better AF, etc the D810 would still produce a nicer file (I love that sensor) - but vs it in DX mode, I'd go D500 all day. Oh, and the D500 sensor seems really nice as well - maybe nicer overall than the D7200 files (and I always thought those were really good).
Hope that helps and I apologize in advance for your upcoming credit card bills and nights on the couch
Steve Perry wrote:
---------------------------------------------
It's not even close - the D500 is in another league.
Not only is the AF faster, the points go all the way across the DX area, so that's pretty sweet. The AF though is just far more tenacious and about the only time it misses is when I don't do my job. It's definitely a step up.
10 FPS is a nice change from the 6 that the D810 does in DX mode (OK, 7 if you have a grip). 4 more opportunities in every burst to get the best shot. I got an avocet with it's beak perfectly open tonight at 10 FPS - only ONE frame captured the moment, the one before and after missed it.
It's also 21MP vs 16MP, so there's more resolution for printing / room for cropping.
As far as noise, I think it's close if you have the D810 in DX mode. Not sure though, I haven't tested that one.
Ergonomically, I think it's better for action. The little joystick makes a huge difference when you need to move the AF point in a hurry, more so than you might expect.
The dedicated DX viewfinder is nice as well - beats concentrating on the small DX area in the D810 - although sometimes it is nice to see what's outside of the frame before you shoot with the 810 in crop mode.
All that said, if you are within full frame range and don't need the FPS, better AF, etc the D810 would still produce a nicer file (I love that sensor) - but vs it in DX mode, I'd go D500 all day. Oh, and the D500 sensor seems really nice as well - maybe nicer overall than the D7200 files (and I always thought those were really good).
Hope that helps and I apologize in advance for your upcoming credit card bills and nights on the couch ...Show more →
If you could only have one camera what would it be? Two cameras? Is the D500 better than most FFs not named D4?
Steen DK wrote:
Thanks a lot for your efforts, Steve, it's a valuable help for our investigations and decisions.
To my eye it seems like D7200 has substantially more vibrant (lively, fresh, vital, sparkling) colors than D500 straight out of the camera (especially visible in the orange and red colors).
The D500 colors appear more dull - at least to my eye.
Can you confirm this from other comparison shots ?
(...)
Never mind, I have now had the opportunity to convert the two comparison files with Capture NX-D and here the colors are far more alike when using this dedicated Nikon converter.
The D500 colors look perfectly fine now, actually even a tad better than the D7200 colors - at least to my eye.
The difference I saw in your posted comparison images may have been due to the camera dependent color profiles in the RAW converter you use.
Thanks a lot for the comparison files, Steve, they provide very useful information.
Just picked up my D500 today. Yet to do anything serious with it except set the camera up to my way of liking. What I really like is the similarity of it and the D810 as far as build quality and button placement etc. Means swapping from one to the other won't result in missed shots because I pressed the wrong button!
