I now have the D4 and just picked up the D500. I wanted to get a little more reach out of my 200-500 so we will see how the images from the D500 are.
After you said you like darker backgrounds and you are to be in dark forest / swamp a lot, it would be really interesting to hear - sorry, read - what you think about low light performance of the D500 in real life. There are contradictory comments around. Looking at the
Photographylife review of the D500 there is a visible improvement against the older D7200 in terms of noise, but it is kind of "moderate" - it is still a crop sensor. Other people - depending on their priority requirements and what they shoot - seem to be really happy with the D500.
I currently don't have one, but I did my own comparisons with real life photos the drop in low light IQ from my D750 to the D7200 (both 24MP) was equivalent to about 1,5 to 2 stops, when looking to unprocessed picture and 100% crops. The day before yesterday my used D4S arrived and I am desparately waiting for the memory card to arrive today. It will be interesting to repeat the test series with a D4S, a D750 and a D7200 side by side.
I'd love to swap my D7200 for a D500 primarily because of the combination of reach, frame rate and buffer size.
However, if you really have to push the limits in terms of low light it has to be FX I guess. Which is logical because unless the innovation wall for current CMOS sensor technology can be overcome the
pixel area size remains to be
the central parameter for noise tolerance.
D7200 --> 3,92 µm --> 15,37 µm²
D500 --> 4,2 µm --> 17,64 µm² --> +15% to the D7200 --> fits to moderate noise improvement of D500 compared to D7200
D4/s --> 7,3 µm --> 53,29 µm² -->
+200% to the D500 --> well, what will that mean in the end
.
The potential of tweaking the limits here by in-camera software technology is more or less scooped.
Maybe one day we find things like Topaz Denoise AI as in-camera plug-in
.
Just been reading this thread, I am in a similar decision making process.
I have just bought a D500 , and have an old D3 ( with about 80,000 shutter actuations).
The D500 is better than I expected, with the 200 500 f5.6 it gives me some great images.
Wish I could use the D3 more, but cropping an image and it’s relatively poor ISO is making me think of a D5 now after reading this.
The D6 is just too much for my budget to stand.
I couldn’t get rid of the D3 though, as I just have an emotional connection with it, and it isn’t worth much money, but does give great images in good light without cropping.
When I got (re-)introduced to nature photography some years I was impressed by the pictures my friend was taking with his gear and I thought I better start small instead of spending a fortune for a pro body without being able to use it properly. And even today I found it to be crazy to spend the money for a D5 or D6. But in the meantime prices for used D4/D4S have come done quite a bit, so may be you consider doing what I did after "talking" to
@Capturingtheunseen.com and get one of these. You have more than 4 MPixels extra (roughly +1/3) compared to your D3, the ISO performance is - even these days - something of the best you can get. There is still not so much room for cropping, but that doesn't matter because
@Steve doesn't like it anyway
. No, I'm joking, he explained really well, why heavy cropping can become dangerous especially if you have to shoot with high ISO. But even he sometimes allows himself to cut off up to 20% of the pixels
.
I don't know where you are, but here in Germany the Nikon Service Points themselves are trading used machines in very good condition. I just got one in perfect condition (looking brandnew, some of the acessories still unpacked) with slightly more than 100k shots on the counter with 30 day return policy and 12 months warranty for about 1.9 k€. Thats about half of what I wold have to pay for a used D5, if you can get find a good one - not talking about a new D6.
... I have to go know, the card has arrived
.
