D850 VS D5?

[Owney]

"Buy/use a D850 when your most of the time shooting in reasonable light."
"Buy/use a D5-D6 or the like when you encounter more challenging lighting conditions and use the FLs to compensate for the lesser rez."

Sorry to sound ignorant, but I don't know what you meant by FLs?

 

[Woodpecker]

"Buy/use a D850 when your most of the time shooting in reasonable light."
"Buy/use a D5-D6 or the like when you encounter more challenging lighting conditions and use the FLs to compensate for the lesser rez."

Sorry to sound ignorant, but I don't know what you meant by FLs?

Thanks for asking the quuestion but as I read your question I thought it might be the FL type lenses !?
This F mount lens generation is a killer if it comes to resolution and the better the lens resolution is, the more detail you can recover until - ideally spoken - you hit the wall of sensor resolution.



It may be off-topic related to the thread title but that leads to an interesting question. How much resolution do you really need from your lens to push your camera to the limit ???
Most of the people including Nasim Mansurov @ Photographylife are running their Imatest setups with a D850 which is providing an insane sensor resolution - talking about FX or DX format. But what part of the resolution you can measure with a D850 is actually recoverable by my D750 with its 24 MPixel and thus slightly more than 50% of the D850's sensor resolution, not talking about 21 MPixel of a D5/D6 or even the 16,x MPixel of my D4S ?

@Steve has provided an excellent explanation some time ago for the impact of sensor pixel size to catching motion blur and keeping in mind that if a shivering photographer is not getting sharp images, it is due to motion blur as well. Against this background it seems logical that the sensor pixel size has major influence on getting sharp images. With all other parameters kept constant you will be able to get sharper images more easy with bigger pixels, but you will not be able to resolve as much detail as with higher resolution sensor, i.e. smaller pixels. At the same time the smaller pixels result in reduced low light tolerance as has been stated above.

Looking at my post above and adding the D850 to the game, its pixel size is 4.35 µm giving a pixel area of roughly 19 µm². This is about 7% moree than the D500 and this fits to the similarity in low light tolerance of both cameras. Of course you can get rid of part of the high ISO noise by downsampling your pictures, but those who use the high res machine for the argument of cropping headroom need to keep in mind that the heavier the crop the more you bring down the effective resolution of you picture and the closer you get to lower res cameras the more obvious their advantage in low light tolerance will be.

And this nothing new and nothing special to the D850 - which I think is a dream macine nevertheless. Years ago my friend (pro photographer) told me baout this just form his experience comparing his D4S as main wildlife and action camera with his D800 and D810 withv the words "the D8x0 is a diva if it comes to avoiding motion blur". Well, if you more than double the sensor resolution and more than half the pixel size you get resolution but you pay for it with low light tolerance and motion blur tolerance. Same story, just one or two camera generations back .

If I had money like I have grass in the backyard, I probably would have a D6, a D850 and a D500 including all the "FLs" just for having the chance to try everything out .
But because I am not into architecture or professional landscapes and I usually have to find some things at home to trage in to have the money for another camera or lens, I think I am better of with lower res cameras that are better in low light and have faster frame rate for less money. They deliver stuning results also with lenses that a D850 would push beyond its limits and thus would not be able to fully utilize the camera's capabilities.
Even @Steve admitted that he is not the most steady person on earth if it comes to handholding, and still sometimes the D850 saves the day by allowing him to crop in cases where he is out there and just doesn't have the right equipment at hand - which I believe only happens very rarely .

And the other downside with ultra-high res sensors is that they force you in an investment rat race due to the enormous gain in data quantity that is generated and the resources needed to process these pictures in an acceptable way. I checked it for myself and the only bit of my infrastructure that I would not have to extend or even replace when dealing with 45.x MPixel 14bit RAWs would be my monitors. The computer would be far too weak regarding RAM, CPU power as well as local storage and the NAS capacity and performance would need a severe boost as well.

As always the decision is a very individual one and it is good that there are so many different comears out there, so everybody can pick the one that fits her/him best.

 

[Woodpecker]

not ignorant at all.
FL = Focal Length

cheers mate

Damn, missed it

 

[Woodpecker]

Well, it’s one of the zillion abbreviations used in photography so I guess it’s understandable.
Allthough I think you’re giving the FLE lenses a bit too much credit.
Don’t get me wrong, resolving power of those lenses is best in the F-mount but they can’t compete with more magnification (FL)
Just like cropping doesn’t equal more magnification.

Yes, I perfectly agree. It was just because it didn't remember that zillion'th acronym , and mislead myself to FL lenses.
But of course magnification is helping better, but the best is if you get both .

 

[bjanes]

Just to add some perspective on the D5 low ISO dynamic range issue. Yes, Nikon made a trade off to achieve amazing high ISO performance but take a look at how the dynamic range of the D5 compares to two earlier top of the line professional cameras from Nikon, the D2X and D3s. Remember these were best of class cameras not all that long ago and literally millions of amazing images were captured with them by professionals and amateurs alike. No one complained about the lack of dynamic range in these professional bodies.

Here's how they compare according to Dxo Mark

It's true that Nikon improved on dynamic range in the D4 series cameras and at low ISOs took a step backwards with the D5 in favor of high ISO performance but the D5 has virtually the same or more dynamic range across its entire range of usable ISOs than the D3s which really was (and is) a great camera.

The topic of this thread is D850 vs D5, so it is instructive to compare dynamic range at various ISOs for these two cameras. At base ISOs the D850 has 2.24 stops better photographic DR than the D5, whereas at high ISOs the D5 has about a stop more DR. It's the story of horses for courses. Bill Claff reports photographic DR which is lower than the engineering DR reported by DXO, but is more appropriate for practical photography.

The D2x was an older generation of CCD sensors and Nikon couldn't compete with Canon's CMOS sensors until it introduced its own CMOS sensor with the D3. If Steve is reading this post, what did you use back then before Nikon's CMOS. I think most pros used Canon.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Bill

 

[Denis99]

Well I have learnt a lot from this thread.

As Steve’s video points out. The more pixels can result in camera shake being amplified , without rock solid hand holding.

For me,the D850 would be a challenge to get images sharp on a consistent rate.

A lower resolution camera with better noise reduction would be better for me.

Really like my D3 , so faster glass would probably be a better solution to get around higher ISO , or a D4S.

A D5 would really be beyond my acceptable budget.

 

[bjanes]

Well I have learnt a lot from this thread.

As Steve’s video points out. The more pixels can result in camera shake being amplified , without rock solid hand holding.

For me,the D850 would be a challenge to get images sharp on a consistent rate.

A lower resolution camera with better noise reduction would be better for me.

Really like my D3 , so faster glass would probably be a better solution to get around higher ISO , or a D4S.

A D5 would really be beyond my acceptable budget.

Like the effects of diffraction, those of camera shake are the same on the sensor regardless of pixel pitch and the image with the high resolution sensor would be no worse than that encountered with a lower resolution sensor. However, to make best use of a high resolution sensor one must use good technique and avoid small apertures (high f/number). The D3 was excellent for dynamic range in its day, but a look at Bill Claff's photographic DR chart will show the D850 has better DR as well as more resolution.

Bill

 

[VStammer]

I have only been out a couple times with the D5 I just purchased and I don't feel I have been able to truly compare it against my D850 quite yet. But what I seem to be noticing early on is two things; 1) focus acquisition and focus lock of birds in flight seems better/quicker with D5. 2) Images with D5 seem to have more noise coming out of the camera; nothing that I have not been able to correct with Topaz DeNoise however. (I shoot most usually in Auto ISO so my results should be fairly consistent). I hope to get out a few more times in the coming weeks and I'll be curious to see how I feel by that time.

 

[Nikondale]

I have both the D5 and the D850. One thing I do like is the ability to use the same battery in both bodies. This is possible with the extra base unit for the D850. Next, both cameras have key features to accommodate your particular style of shooting. All the talk of file size and cropping only makes me remember my D2X. I printed many 13X19 with those small, cropped files. If you are interested in a new body, go for the D850. If you are looking at a used body, get a D5 from an actual user, like me, who is going to upgrade to a D6 in the future. Good luck with your body selection

 

[Calson]

I switched from Nikon to Canon in 2005 as the ISO performance of the D2x was terrible. Above ISO 640 the D2x image files were not usable. I switched back to Nikon in 2007 when the D3 was released along with the 14-24mm and 24-70mm lens. Canon had nothing comparable to the D3 or the two zoom lenses.

My D3 12MP sensor files were fine if I did no cropping. When I got a D800e it was quite an experience to see how much the files could be enlarged without problems and how well the noise was controlled at ISO 6400. To me the D850 has more resolution than I need but with Nikon the only alternative if one wants the new autofocus system is the D5 or D6 with their 20MP sensors which with a DX crop become 8.9MP cameras with less resolution than the D2x from 2004. I understand that with the D5 and D6 that the emphasis is on fps and not with image enlargement or the ability to crop and print. The market for these cameras is the sports shooter and the overall feature set is tuned to their needs which is why the emphasis on Wifi and ignoring built-in GPS until the D6 arrived (something that was provided with the D5300 introduced in 2013).

When I got into underwater photography it became an expensive pursuit as I also needed to invest in a small boat and an outboard engine to get me an my gear safely to where I could dive and take pictures. Same is true with digital cameras like the D850 where I needed to upgrade my computer and my network switch at a cost of $5,000. I also had to invest in a set of XQD cards although that was a blessing as CF cards were a pain, what with needing special card readers and dealing with bent pins.

I now use two D850's and have one with the battery grip and using EN-EL18 batteries to get 9 fps. I have the option of a DX crop that provides an image comparable to a DX 19MP camera like the D500 or more than 50% more resolution than a D5 or D6. If all my photography was in places like Florida where camera to subject distances are relatively short then a 20MP camera would not be a problem at all. But in Yellowstone the D850 with my 600mm lens provides the image size of a D6 with the 800mm lens and there would be far fewer times when I could be OK with the 500mm PF lens.

 

[Nikondale]

Here is my bottom line. I like both cameras. I use both on the same day out shooting. I do not need the D6 but when I sell my D5, I will buy one and see if Steve is correct in his assessment. Until then, keep shooting.

 

[VStammer]

So far I agree with Nikondale, I like both cameras, but for different reasons. I like the resolution and ability to crop generously on the D850. I luv the shutter speed and focus tracking and subject acquire & lock on the D5.
Darn, I was hoping to not have to keep both of these bodies! I will likely stay with these until Nikon can produce a better mirrorless body for my needs.

 

[Letolen]

[QUOTE="VStammer, post: 20943,
Darn, I was hoping to not have to keep both of these bodies! I will likely stay with these until Nikon can produce a better mirrorless body for my needs.
VStammer if you could, could you choose just one?

 

[VStammer]

[QUOTE="VStammer, post: 20943,
Darn, I was hoping to not have to keep both of these bodies! I will likely stay with these until Nikon can produce a better mirrorless body for my needs.
VStammer if you could, could you choose just one?

Letolen; Although I still haven't shot many pics with my D5 yet if I had to choose today it might just have to be the D850. I hope to use the D5 more to find more value in its strong points that make it more valuable for my shooting needs. However, it is a very individual decision based on your unique shooting style and subject matter. Like I stated, they both have their strengths.

 

[IainD]

And you can get great battery life with a grip and EN EL 18 battery on the D850 for the times you need it! The rest of the time it can be lighter.

 

[VStammer]

One can’t compare a D850 with a D4-5-6.
The D850 is a MPV and the single digit cameras is a Shelby Cobra.

If you need versatility, don’t shoot in lowlight all the time, don’t need the highest framerates, endless buffer and fastest AF speed, don’t want to buy the longest supertele lenses buy a D500, D850 (or a Z7)
If you want the best AF and noise performance in lowlight and (IF you are into wildlifephotography) you’re willing to buy the longest lenses to compensate for the lesser rez, buy a D4-5-6.

We tend to forget the single digit cameras are built and targeted at the pro-shooter.
Priority number 1 for a pro is to get ‘that shot’ nothing else, preferably with a good jpeg engine and (these days) some sort of connectivity to be able to upload immediately.

The wildlife photog discovered these cameras to be very useable in certain conditions and scenarios and they are indeed, but especially then, in most other lightingconditions and scenarios they’re easily surpassed by the double digit cameras.

In the end it’s a simple choice and I will always recommend the D500 (imo the real at WL targeted camera) the D850 if you allso like to shoot sceneries, macro, portraiture, family aso
And the SingleD for regular lowlight shooting and or the WLphotog knowing and willing to accept the disadvantages of these cameras.

Don’t forget the price difference between a D850 and a D6 is to say the least significant and the advantages of the latter are very restricted.
Better speed overall, buffer, better SNR and better build plus battery life.
At the cost of much money, higher rez and thus less crop ability and the almost mandatory need to buy longer glass.

Again the above is from my perspective as a WL photog.

FYI I shoot with a D6 and a D5 (my former like new BU camera) for wildlife and a Z7 for ‘everything else’

I guess I better get my Shelby Cobra(D5) out of the barn and drive the wheels off of it! I liked your response and thoughts on the subject.

 

[guydagar]

I recently bought a D5 from someone who owns ( Well owned both now I bought the D5 ) the D850 too, I asked if it was sensible to buy a D850 in the near future and he answered that the D850 is very slow with tracking fast subjects and also has many problems when shooting in low light conditions.

So I concluded that the D850 is a nice weather camera and is superb for shooting (very) slow-moving or passive subjects, I hope this will help you decide what camera is better for you.

Now owning a D5, D4s, and a D4 I know that the D5 is my to-go camera and after shooting a couple of times with the D5 I know I'll never get rid of this magnificent camera.

I'll even consider trading the D4s and D4 for a second D5 body if the shutter count isn't too high and the body looks as new because the one I bought only had 2300 shutter counts and is as a new camera!

Lucky me.

Pretty much my story as well. I've had the D850 for some years, along with a Z7 and a Z6 II, and while the D850 is a great camera for many things, it never quite satisfied when it came to focussing fast and holding focus in low light or behind tree branches. I recently had the great good fortune to find and buy a D5 with less than 3K clicks that I purchased immediately having heard so many good things about it. As you say, I say I'll never get rid of this magnificent camera—it continues to amaze me every time I shoot with it.