D500

I had hoped for better TBH, though obviously I know nothing about the specifics of taking/processing.
 
gramps said:
:thinking:

It's one photo so cannot be a decider for the camera, however if that's the best that I could get, I wouldn't see a reason to be excited about getting one :)
Click to expand...

Are you joking? That's at 6400 ISO...my D7200 looks that noisy at about 800!
 
Agreed, In general I won't use my 7100 over 1600 with a top limit of 3200....
I feel my D800 is better at 6400 than the 7100 at 1600.
 
htid said:
Are you joking? That's at 6400 ISO...my D7200 looks that noisy at about 800!
Click to expand...

I'm not joking, sure it should be better than the D7200 at 6400 but that photo doesn't inspire me ... of course there is an awful lot more images and reviews to come (hopefully!) before I will be making any decision. On that image alone I would definitely keep my D7200/D810 combination :)
 
htid said:
Are you joking? That's at 6400 ISO...my D7200 looks that noisy at about 800!
Click to expand...
It looks about like my D4 at 6400 (it *really* depends on the light levels though).
But, there's too many *if's* to really say anything definitive. I can say that there's not enough contrast/fine detail to assume that there's nothing but high ISO going on...
 
The noise looks good but all we know is it was taken with a D500 and a 500mm Tin low-light situation during sunset, on the river, at ISO 6400. (Sun was almost behind the trees at 5.30PM)

No mention of cropping and looking at the other bird images I'm not sure as they seem to be cropped a lot.

I'm waiting for more info before deciding on this or the D5.
 
Not the best of photos to show off the camera is it, they just look dull.
 
They look a lot more encouraging to me ... Chameleon at ISO 51200 :)
 
shapeshifter said:
Come on! It's Nikon blowing it's own trumpet. Wait and see what Ken Rockwell has to say when he has tested it.:runaway:
Click to expand...

I read his D500 review page back when Nikon first announced its release :banghead:
 
gramps said:
They look a lot more encouraging to me ... Chameleon at ISO 51200 :)
Click to expand...

If that's 51200, then either this camera is AMAZING at high ISO or they've done some seeeerious NR on that background :D
 
htid said:
If that's 51200, then either this camera is AMAZING at high ISO or they've done some seeeerious NR on that background :D
Click to expand...

It is 51200 but the shadows have been reduced a lot to hide the noise and create the pure black background and the res is low so it hides it on the chameleon.
 
Jase said:
It is 51200 but the shadows have been reduced a lot to hide the noise and create the pure black background and the res is low so it hides it on the chameleon.
Click to expand...

It's 1280 x 853, not hi-res for sure but look beyond the black background to the Chameleon itself and I think that's pretty impressive for ISO 51200, I would be interested to see you replicate it with another camera :)
 
gramps said:
It's 1280 x 853, not hi-res for sure but look beyond the black background to the Chameleon itself and I think that's pretty impressive for ISO 51200, I would be interested to see you replicate it with another camera :)
Click to expand...
Pretty sure you could with any modern Nikon FF :p
 
gramps said:
It's 1280 x 853, not hi-res for sure but look beyond the black background to the Chameleon itself and I think that's pretty impressive for ISO 51200, I would be interested to see you replicate it with another DX camera :)
Click to expand...

Fixed it for you ;)
 
gramps said:
Over to you...
Click to expand...
Lol, not sure I'd have the talent or the lighting they had ;)

My post was tongue in cheek hence the emoji, but joking aside whilst it's impressive we have no idea of PP and also I'd eat my hat if the D500 being a crop sensor has better noise handling at high ISO than modern FF's. I'm sure if the same person took the same shot with the same lighting with a D750, DF, D5 etc the shot would be cleaner.
 
snerkler said:
Lol, not sure I'd have the talent or the lighting they had ;)

My post was tongue in cheek hence the emoji, but joking aside whilst it's impressive we have no idea of PP and also I'd eat my hat if the D500 being a crop sensor has better noise handling at high ISO than modern FF's. I'm sure if the same person took the same shot with the same lighting with a D750, DF, D5 etc the shot would be cleaner.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but IF the d500 (as a DX) is anywhere near as good without PP as the photo suggest, Nikon are onto a winner I think.
 
snerkler said:
I'm sure if the same person took the same shot with the same lighting with a D750, DF, D5 etc the shot would be cleaner.
Click to expand...

Discounting the D5 which I am sure will be better, the others have a 'normal' ISO range that limits them to ISO 12800 (can be extended) so I think it would be highly unlikely that they could match the D500. which has ISO 51200 within its 'normal' range :)
 
gramps said:
D500 @ ISO6400 ... Impressed or not?

http://wildlife.cslingphotography.c...ling_borneo_blue-eared-kingfisher-closeup.jpg
Click to expand...

Lets no get defensive because its Nikon,that image is carp,it may be better than i can get with my D7200 and Tamron 150-600 but i would not spend the money for that result,if he had a expensive Nikon lens on then the result is even more upsetting,ime going to risk ridicule and put an example of the D7200 and Tamron 150-600 at ISO 6400,when you consider my outfit cost less than the camera body and my lack of ability in PP plus no NR on the main subject,i will wait until the prices drop a long way.

DSC_3208.jpg
 
mikew said:
Lets no get defensive because its Nikon,that image is carp,it may be better than i can get with my D7200 and Tamron 150-600 but i would not spend the money for that result,if he had a expensive Nikon lens on then the result is even more upsetting,ime going to risk ridicule and put an example of the D7200 and Tamron 150-600 at ISO 6400,when you consider my outfit cost less than the camera body and my lack of ability in PP plus no NR on the main subject,i will wait until the prices drop a long way.

View attachment 55568
Click to expand...

I agree with you on that Kingfisher image Mike, it doesn't represent the D500 well and I think says more about that specific photo/photographer than the D500 (Nikon didn't use it in their publicity bumf, though they did two of the others) ... however if you look at the Chameleon (ISO 51200) in the other link, I believe that is pretty impressive and if that reflect the low-light ability of the D500 it has to be a winner :)
 
gramps said:
Discounting the D5 which I am sure will be better, the others have a 'normal' ISO range that limits them to ISO 12800 (can be extended) so I think it would be highly unlikely that they could match the D500. which has ISO 51200 within its 'normal' range :)
Click to expand...
Good point, I forget that it's extended ISO to get that with my D750 :facepalm: :LOL: I had to try it for myself of course as I've never taken my camera above native ISO, so here's hi 2 ISO which is 51200. Unfortunately I don't have a reptile of any kind, but here's a quick grab shot of a wooden dragon this morning before work so don't expect a work of art ;) Blacks reduced slightly, sharpening increased to 65 and 50 NR added in LR

DSC_7612_zpsgemugkaj.jpg



Hmmm, looks a bit odd here I'll add a link to the file in dropbox if you're interested.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/eoqqzxvdjdcw0xk/DSC_7612.jpg?dl=0
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
I agree with you on that Kingfisher image Mike, it doesn't represent the D500 well and I think says more about that specific photo/photographer than the D500 (Nikon didn't use it in their publicity bumf, though they did two of the others) ... however if you look at the Chameleon (ISO 51200) in the other link, I believe that is pretty impressive and if that reflect the low-light ability of the D500 it has to be a winner :)
Click to expand...

I have seen the Nikon samples but would like to see what percentage of photographers that buy it can achieve that quality,i bet i cant,no matter how good a camera is under controlled conditions purchasers should be realistic about what it can do for them with there ability and lenses in every day use,yes you can shoot 100fps;) knock nails in with the body:D but i need to see real world none Nikon samples to prove to me it will gain anything for me.
 
I think having having a quality prime lens is more important than the camera, so I will be sticking with my D7100 and the D750. to my mind its ok to have an impressive high iso camera but as a birder why would I need it ! from my point of view I do not want to spend a fortune just so I can take bird pics on dull days, I can do that now with the D750 ok it might not have the range but it works for me, I will not say never but the price will have to drop a long way first.
 
gramps said:
They look a lot more encouraging to me ... Chameleon at ISO 51200 :)
Click to expand...

What you reckon on the leopard (cat) using the 500mm f4 lens and 2.0 TC @ iso 320, he seems to have missed focus on the eyes/head a little as it seems better on the front leg looking on my monitor. Possibly not helped by the 1/80 shutter speed for that set-up.
 
snerkler said:
Good point, I forget that it's extended ISO to get that with my D750 :facepalm: :LOL: I had to try it for myself of course as I've never taken my camera above native ISO, so here's hi 2 ISO which is 51200. Unfortunately I don't have a reptile of any kind, but here's a quick grab shot of a wooden dragon this morning before work so don't expect a work of art ;) Blacks reduced slightly, sharpening increased to 65 and 50 NR added in LR

DSC_7612_zpsgemugkaj.jpg




Hmmm, looks a bit odd here I'll add a link to the file in dropbox if you're interested.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/eoqqzxvdjdcw0xk/DSC_7612.jpg?dl=0
Click to expand...

Sorry but it doesn't compare to the Chameleon for me, the detail in the Chameleon and lack of noise (for ISO 51200!) is something very different IMO. :)
 
Swanseajack said:
What you reckon on the leopard (cat) using the 500mm f4 lens and 2.0 TC @ iso 320, he seems to have missed focus on the eyes/head a little as it seems better on the front leg looking on my monitor. Possibly not helped by the 1/80 shutter speed for that set-up.
Click to expand...

Not sure about focus TBH, the teeth look pretty good to me ... however focus etc is to a large degree photographer dependant, this new set of images gives me far more confidence in the ISO ability of the D500, something that the previous Kingfisher shot didn't, indeed the Kingfisher looked to me as though there was no benefit in upgrading to the camera, now I'm more open-minded :)
 
gramps said:
Not sure about focus TBH, the teeth look pretty good to me ... however focus etc is to a large degree photographer dependant, this new set of images gives me far more confidence in the ISO ability of the D500, something that the previous Kingfisher shot didn't, indeed the Kingfisher looked to me as though there was no benefit in upgrading to the camera, now I'm more open-minded :)
Click to expand...

Thanks Roger, I was interested in your thoughts for the lens and TC combo giving him a 1000 FL, plus crop if he was using the x2 TC. Seems very promising.

Agree with the Kingfisher, didn't look that great to me either. I suppose you will be keeping a very close eye on the camera when more user reviews are out. Would be a nice combo with your D810.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top