About ISO 4000, although I really prefer to be under ISO 2000 when I can.
D500 inferior? Maybe not.
- Thread starter Capturingtheunseen.com
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I have the D500 and have used it over the last couple of years. I've always said it did not have good low light capability and yet I would read where others said it did. I'm happy to read here that others feel as I do. I love the camera, the speed, the buffer, everything but I do wish it had better low light capability. I'm debating about getting another Nikon at this point but still sitting on the fence as I do love the camera. I also own the Z7. I have found it confusing at times to recall the settings between the two cameras, DSLR and mirrorless, so thinking a different DSLR instead of the Z7 (but not specifically for wildlife).
Warren D
Well-known member
Can't go wrong with the D850 if your budget will allow. The BSI sensor seems to handle higher ISO's than the D500 and with some NR in post, files at 6400 look pretty good. AF response is a little below the D500 and the biggest downside is the extra cash for a grip and battery set-up that will get you to 9 fps. If 9 fps isn't important and you can live with 6 fps (what did we do 10 years ago???) it's probably still the best dslr made.
This is a very interesting/helpful post for me! I've had a D500 for just short of three years and wanted to get a second camera body, so I could have my Nikon 80-400 on one body and my 16-80 on a second body. I really "struggled" as to whether I should get a second D500 or a D850. I felt like having two D500's, was not necessarily a very smart way to go, BUT, to buy a new D850, I was going to putting $4K into camera body, chargers, batteries and grip. I'd also have to replace my Nikon 16-80, as it isn't a good match for the D850. I'd also have to look at buying a longer lens, as I'd be loosing the 600mm with my 80-400 on the D500. After seeing where things were going with the Z's, I decided to buy the second D500 and wait until the Z's had something that would match the D500 for AF speed/tracking. If I did that, I knew I'd still have to look at at 24-70 and something longer. Have been very impressed with the reviews of the 24-70 (Z series), as well as the 70-200 (Z series). I've really enjoy having my SKB case with both bodies - one with the 80-400, and one with the 16-80. I did purchase the 70-200 F2.8 for DOF/low light, which also gives me one more body/lens combination.
In reading the original Post/replies, I am comfortable with the decision I made. My focus needs to be on really learning the capability of what what I have. Based on the pictures posted, I've still got a big learning curve ahead of me, but, having two bodies the same, it also provides the advantage of not having an additional variance based on two bodies that have their own idiosyncrasies!
In reading the original Post/replies, I am comfortable with the decision I made. My focus needs to be on really learning the capability of what what I have. Based on the pictures posted, I've still got a big learning curve ahead of me, but, having two bodies the same, it also provides the advantage of not having an additional variance based on two bodies that have their own idiosyncrasies!
Last edited:
Capturingtheunseen.com
Well-known member
That's true, Ralph. If this was too easy what fun would that be? haha
Snapshot2020
Well-known member
I too considered the purchase of a second D500 but recently purchased the D850. The D850 renewed that learning curve and so far I’m pleased with the results, compared to the D500 the 850 is definitely a step above in regards to image quality. As for Mirrorless that’s a option to consider if the next Mirrorless has the Focus Speeds as the Pro DSLR Cameras.
ruley74
Well-known member
I have the opposite problem regards metering, mainly because i use spot with highlight protection most of the time. It's so good for white birds it's almost cheating, but darker birds with some light backgrounds has you reaching for exposure comp.
Maybe give the spot with highlight a try.
Squawk
Well-known member
I was disappointed on the low light performance but that's outweighed by other advantages so just live with it. I've recently moved to matrix metering from spot as a default and like it much more. On the eagle shot I'd compensate by - 1.3 in sunshine and -.7 when overcast. I generally can guess the required compensation for any shot and if there's time I may take a test. Have a look at Steve's video on spot metering, it was a light bulb moment for me.
Be very careful with spot metering ... read Steve's recent blogs/ articles on spot metering and the size of the spot they are invaluable. I am more prone to use it on dark objects against a bright sky than I am on white. I shoot birds in flight quite a bit and I try to remember to use center weighted metering and meter off anything in the white tonal range and then AF button to lock the exposure (until I turn it off or the standby timer expires) also I find that on subjects such as bald eagles I frequently need to bump my EV up by .7 (2/3 of a stop. Steves metering book is a great tool if you have not purchased it.
With the help of techniques learned from your great noise reduction video using LR and PS I have gotten better at controlling the noise in my D500 and D850 up front and now LR has improved so much that I have not had to go to PS in over a year. I also have Topaz Denoise A1 and seldom use it (it creates huge tiff files). As you have said noise tolerance is quite variable by individual I actually have my max sensitivity settings on auto ISO set at 8000 on the D500 and 6400 on the D850.
Great discussion and yes there is a learning curve with each new camera. I shoot with 2 D500's ... one with the battery pack and the D5/6 battery and a D850 with the battery grip and the D5/6 batttery. I do like having my external controls being essentially the same egronomically. I use the D500's 80% of the time for wildlife and BIF. I am most likely to use the D850 with my 500PF if I know I am going to be in low light or very high dyanmic range situations and want to travel light.
D
Deleted member 115
Guest
I have only tried it a time or two and haven't liked it, maybe now that I am a little more experienced I will try again as needed. I switch between center and matrix mostly
Dustydewey
New member
I went from D 5000 years ago to D500 3 yrs ago Struggled with obtaining tack sharp images , trying to improve tech, even mounted on sturdy tripod with 3 sec delay was not satisfied with "good glass " (105 mm 2.8 , 24-70mm 2.8 ) and more ! Did the lens align thing and no improvement until recently , for giggles , used the in camera auto fine tune, I am happy to say have much improved rate of keepers ! Have the D850 and lovin it !! So nice to see familiar button position back and forth Have ISO maxed at 8000 Use 300mmPF f4 with 1.4 x So now im dealing with losing a stop to 5.6 Hence higher ISO with no noticeable noise
Calson
Well-known member
When I first switched from a D3 to the D800e I was noticing less sharp images from the D800e and then I realized that it was the result of camera motion blur that was far easier to detect with the greatly increased resolution provided by the D800e camera.
The D500 has a 20.9MP and the D4 camera in DX mode or with a cropped or enlarged image has the equivalent of a 5.7MP sensor or less resolution than the D1x camera. Naturally there will be more to see with the D500 image file and any issues with technique or settings will also be more apparent.
The D500 has a 20.9MP and the D4 camera in DX mode or with a cropped or enlarged image has the equivalent of a 5.7MP sensor or less resolution than the D1x camera. Naturally there will be more to see with the D500 image file and any issues with technique or settings will also be more apparent.
TimD
New member
Gorgeous Eagles. Thank you
I love my D500, acknowledge there is faster FPS , faster and more accurate AF focusing and higher resolution all to be had with others.
Having said that, I will probably add a second D500 body and learn to use the remaining 60% of the camera that has yet to be explored.
Tim
I love my D500, acknowledge there is faster FPS , faster and more accurate AF focusing and higher resolution all to be had with others.
Having said that, I will probably add a second D500 body and learn to use the remaining 60% of the camera that has yet to be explored.
Tim
There's quality as well as quantity.
The FF sensor in my Sony A9 produces images with a kind of pop that my D500 can't match (though the latter is more likely to capture the bird).
The FF sensor in my Sony A9 produces images with a kind of pop that my D500 can't match (though the latter is more likely to capture the bird).
Encourage you to watch, if you haven't, "Spot Metering Crash Course - Steve's video". It is great! Filled with several "I didn't know that" or "Gee, I should have known that!"
woodym1
Active member
I have seen on youtube that the D500 blows out hi lights All say underexpose a bit Anything to this?
euanmax
New member
I have only had my D500 for a few weeks but had read similar. However, I took a series of shots recently that were overexposed and was surprised to find that highlight recovery was pretty good in my experience (using Capture One 20). I wonder if the highlight clipping is more apparent when you’re at base ISO? I’m typically a lot higher than base for most of my bird photography so not sure if that is a factor here.
Graham Clark
gc-graphs
I've found it more of an issue with specular highlights, I shoot a lot of aviation stuff and can have problems around landing lights. Don't see the same issue on either the D5 or D850.
robg
Member
Very interesting thread. I'm about to get a D500 for my birthday (actually I already have it, but my better half won't let me at it yet…). I've been using a D7100 for the past three years or so, and am pretty familiar and comfortable with my setup and results. I mainly shoot miscellaneous wildlife/nature and flowers as well as just general purpose photography of no particular genre. I use back button focus, mainly with single-point focus and occasionally with D9. I mostly use matrix metering, dialling in some exposure compensation when necessary, and occasionally use spot metering.
So, a question to those of you who have successfully navigated a similar transition (i.e. from a D7100 or similar to a D500): what are the major learning points I'm likely to face? What settings will I need to be immediately looking at configuring on the D500 in order to be up and running as quickly as possible?
So, a question to those of you who have successfully navigated a similar transition (i.e. from a D7100 or similar to a D500): what are the major learning points I'm likely to face? What settings will I need to be immediately looking at configuring on the D500 in order to be up and running as quickly as possible?
woodym1
Active member
Robg: I am in the same process moving from D7100 to D500 for my next camera
Wow, what a mean creature
. No, just joking. I think it is great if partners appreciate and support their hobbies and so a litlte bit of her is with you when shooting.IMO it is not so much the particular model, but the different layout and behaviour of the camera. Because I often have big breaks in practicing my hobby I was keen on having bodies with - almost - exactly the same layout like I used to shoot two D750 and a D7200. Now - partly initiated by members of this forum here I replaced one D750 with a D4S and the main learning point for me is the intuitive playing with the setup while shooting and NOT taking my eye of the camera. The button layout is different, but after coppying the setup options from my D750/D7200 over to the D4S this turned out to be easier than I thought. In fact I realized that after a very short period the thinking about ergonomics that the Nikon guys have put in the pro bodies does pay off and everything works just more flawlessly than before.
As you are used to have the D7100 which is very similar to D750/D7200 and D500 is from its layout pretty close to the pro bodies I am pretty sure you will feel the same.
As most buttons are programmable you should be able to bring your D500 close enough wo what you have been used to before. The only thing you mentioned to use has moved considerably - to the other side of the camera - is the metering mode button.
One thing that really needs changing in my behaviour is that I really used the user modes on my D750 and D7200 - also to allow quick and reliable resetting to my preferred settings after playing with the options. With the D4S I have to get the discipine to set back mode, auto ISO, EC etc. one by one. That would be the same for you when moving to the D500 as it also has no program dial with user modes. If you did everything separately also on your D7100 you are at least one step in front compared with me
.
This matches roughly my comfort zone with the D7200 (Auto ISO limit 2500, optional 4500) - and it was the reason for me to stay with FX for my primary camera in order to get more noise headroom.
Sorry, but you seem to have caught the wrong page here. Dynamic range and noise are two different things. For comparing noise you need to look at the SNR18% (Signal Noise Ratio) page (one to the left) and there you can see that there is no significant improvement from D7200 to D500, which matches the statements in the other reviews out there. SNR is measured in dB while Dynamic Range is measured in Ev (i.e. stops).
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
However, if I had to get a DX body today to get the extra reach I'd go for the D500. It gives me similar IQ level as the D7200 - with slighlty smaller resolution - combined with a huge buffer and a fantastic frame rate - as long as I can have a decent full frame camera to address the real low light situtions.
Last edited: