DX to Full frame 500 to D5?

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).

Guy Harr

Guy Harr

Active member
Member's gallery
I have been shooting the D500 for the last three years. Very pleased overall with tit. I want to move to FX , and my thinking or reasoning is that the FX will give me better low light results. High ISO on the D500 most of the time is quite acceptable , at least to me, but It does bother me especially during those early morning shoots. So question for those who use FX, will I get better results on the noise end using say a D5 over the D500? Same lens .
I know I'll need to get closer or use a longer lens to get the same image size. Really just concerned with better high ISO results? Or am I chasing a dream?
 
Member's gallery
Guy Harr said:
So question for those who use FX, will I get better results on the noise end using say a D5 over the D500? Same lens .
Click to expand...
Assuming you can fill the D5 frame and not have to crop down to DX level then yes there's a pretty substantial noise advantage with the D5. I shot both side by side for quite a while and the D5 really is a pretty amazing low light camera when you can fill the frame.

The noise quality in the D5 and D6 is also a fine grain luminance sort of noise which takes to noise reduction techniques very well. For instance on paper the Z6 II should be very close to the D5/D6 in terms of high ISO noise performance but I currently run a D6 and Z6 II along with my D500 and it's much easier to clean up images from the D6 as the Z6 II to my eyes has quite a bit more chroma noise at high ISO settings which takes more effort to clean up.

But it really does come down to filling the larger FX frame which as you say means getting closer or using fast longer glass as once you start cropping down to DX or further a lot of those high ISO noise advantages go away for the same size output images.
 
Member's gallery
Not much to add to above about correct framing with the D5, as the 20mp FX files are less flexible for cropping, unlike a D850.
It's always important to expose optimally, as is feasible: - ETTR
The sensor data reveal the significant advantage to the D5


I've found the D5 superb for African wildlife, mammals particularly. The AF is extremely robust. Lowlight performance is indeed excellent. It's well worth buying Thom Hogan's D5 ebook, as for example for advice for optimizing ISO settings, and much more

See some D5 examples at high ISO

Photo with high ISO - 57,600.

The photo was taken with my Nikon D5 as an experiment. Not bad for 57,600 ISO. Do you have any photos with extreme ISO settings that are presentable?
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
fcotterill said:
Not much to add to above about correct framing with the D5, as the 20mp are less flexible for cropping, unlike a D850.
It's always important to expose optimally, as is feasible: - ETTR
The sensor data reveal the significant advantage to the D5


I've found the D5 superb for African wildlife, mammals particularly. The AF is extremely robust. Lowlight performance is indeed excellent. It's well worth buying Thom Hogan's D5 ebook, as for example optimizing ISO settings etc

See some D5 examples at high ISO

Photo with high ISO - 57,600.

The photo was taken with my Nikon D5 as an experiment. Not bad for 57,600 ISO. Do you have any photos with extreme ISO settings that are presentable?
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
Click to expand...
Thank you for the feedback and the attachments.
 
Member's gallery
You're going to miss the crop factor. The D5 is superior in every possible way (save cost). But again, you'll miss the crop. Also, why not D6 if you're sticking with a Nikon DSLR? It's not much more and it has some great features the 5 doesn't.
 
Member's gallery
I shot D500, 850, and D5. As others have said above you'll see a difference IF you shoot the same field of view. If you end up shooting things from the same distance and cropping away 60 percent of the D5 image then the ISO advantage goes out the window.
 
Member's gallery
grossidm said:
You're going to miss the crop factor. The D5 is superior in every possible way (save cost). But again, you'll miss the crop. Also, why not D6 if you're sticking with a Nikon DSLR? It's not much more and it has some great features the 5 doesn't.
Click to expand...
I agree with all you have said, low budget is my issue. The D6 yes has some nice features but don't really need those and puts me into another budget bracket. Gotta skimp somewhere. Will need to put the money into longer lens to compensate for loss of the crop factor. Or do I( stick with what I have and keep working on my efforts...
 
Member's gallery
I recently needed to edit a few of my D5 and D6 photos for printing. Editing the photos has me realizing I need another D5. And the price is very attractive now, for a camera that will last near forever. I will keep the D500, but will get a D5 to shoot along with the Z9. I was a dumb az- for selling the D6 when I purchased the Z9.
 
Member's gallery
@Guy Harr , yah I didn't suggest a D6 given your budget but this is definitely the camera to aim for. I've little more to add to what's already been said

One excellent camera and the best DSLR yet made, at least in my parochial experience :D

Keep the Canon 1Dx Mk iii or Nikon D6? (or, adding a DSLR supertelephoto for BIF)

So here’s the dilemma: I realize that mirrorless is the future. I can see and have read about how many BIF shooters are moving to the Sony A1 (Mark Smith, Arthur Morris, Ari Hazeghi, etc) and I’m sure some of them are landing in Nikon/Canon land. I have also briefly rented the A1 and can see...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
 
Member's gallery
Guy Harr said:
I have been shooting the D500 for the last three years. Very pleased overall with tit. I want to move to FX , and my thinking or reasoning is that the FX will give me better low light results. High ISO on the D500 most of the time is quite acceptable , at least to me, but It does bother me especially during those early morning shoots. So question for those who use FX, will I get better results on the noise end using say a D5 over the D500? Same lens .
I know I'll need to get closer or use a longer lens to get the same image size. Really just concerned with better high ISO results? Or am I chasing a dream?
Click to expand...
When not using my Z9 I still use D500/D5 and D850.
The D500 is a great low light camera - The D5 has much better dynamic range and low noise.
A lens doesn't change with a different sized sensor - small sensors only crop the image and DOF etc remain the same.
I use the D5 for extreme action/low light and the D850 any other time ... 🦘
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top