D500

In common with others here I was disappointed with the image quality of the D500 when I first used it, coming from a D750 the noise seemed really bad,
I purchased it to use with my 200-500 for the extra reach and the much improved buffer, I seriously considered selling it on, however I persevered with it
and now find that with a combination of DFine and Lightroom noise reduction I am getting very acceptable results and I now know I need to work even more
on my PP skills to get the very best from it, so it is going nowhere and neither is the D750.
 
old bloke said:
In common with others here I was disappointed with the image quality of the D500 when I first used it, coming from a D750 the noise seemed really bad,
I purchased it to use with my 200-500 for the extra reach and the much improved buffer, I seriously considered selling it on, however I persevered with it
and now find that with a combination of DFine and Lightroom noise reduction I am getting very acceptable results and I now know I need to work even more
on my PP skills to get the very best from it, so it is going nowhere and neither is the D750.
Click to expand...

I'm just trialling opening files with Nikon's Capture NX-D then importing to Photoshop ... Capture does seem to deal with the fine noise very well, making it easier to process :)
 
I am currently editing in Lightroom then exporting to Photoshop to sharpen and then to Dfine2 for noise reduction. A bit of a faff - but the results are better than just using Lightroom and I am not exactly doing loads of images (I normally only get a couple a week that I keep)
 
Recieved my D500 a couple of days ago and Ive been out using it with the Nikkor Af-s 80-400 zoom.
First impressions,... Focussing is excellent, frames per second and buffer are excellent...... Noise is poo. (Other camera is a D750).
Im clearly going to have my work cut out with the D500.
 
Simplythebeast said:
Noise is poo. (Other camera is a D750).
Im clearly going to have my work cut out with the D500.
Click to expand...

It seems that way at first but the noise is different, much smaller and easier to work with where necessary.
 
No doubt I will get used to it.... Just a bit spoilt by the full frame D750 and the ability to crop easily.
 
Dave Semmens said:
I am currently editing in Lightroom then exporting to Photoshop to sharpen and then to Dfine2 for noise reduction. A bit of a faff - but the results are better than just using Lightroom and I am not exactly doing loads of images (I normally only get a couple a week that I keep)
Click to expand...
I read somewhere to do the noise reduction first because otherwise you are sharpening the noise, no doubt there are many different ways of doing the same thing, I shall just keep playing.
 
old bloke said:
I read somewhere to do the noise reduction first because otherwise you are sharpening the noise, no doubt there are many different ways of doing the same thing, I shall just keep playing.
Click to expand...

I always do any n/r first for that reason :)
 
Always sharpened first - must have seen it on a video at some point.

Not thought about it but wi look into it.

I am not sharpening much - just a limited high pass on the key areas. So I don't expect it will make much difference.
 
shapeshifter said:
Noise seems to be a big problem with this camera! Is it worse than a D7200?
Click to expand...

No! - There is noise, but as I have said before it is very small rather than the 'blotchy' noise associated with other bodies I have used including the D7200.
I find that if I fill the frame with my subject noise is minimal but heavy crops produce more noticeable but small noise, however it is easier to deal with. I am just now opening RAW files with Capture NX-D and importing to PS ... default noise reduction is working pretty well.
 
Actually I think it's worse than the d7200 at 1000 and below ISO. I was looking through some old photos from my d5000 yesterday and noticed that the noise at iso 800 was BETTER than the d500! I'm going to compare side by side with photos which are similar when I get chance.
 
Was out with the camera tonight - had a duck fly straight in towards me.

Out of16 shots only one slightly out of focus. This thing is a beast when it comes to focusing.

Here is the last image in the sequence - little editing / crop but no noise reduction or sharpening - the light was rubbish but the focus was superb.

DSC_1038 by Dave Semmens, on Flickr
 
Dave Semmens said:
Was out with the camera tonight - had a duck fly straight in towards me.

Out of16 shots only one slightly out of focus. This thing is a beast when it comes to focusing.

Here is the last image in the sequence - little editing / crop but no noise reduction or sharpening - the light was rubbish but the focus was superb.
Click to expand...


This is the big advance in DX in this camera. :)
 
rather than try to read 1257 posts i was wondering how owners of the d500 are finding it
i currently shoot with a d7100 and a d700
im thinking of either the d500 or the d810
would appreciate your honest opinion of how your finding the d500

cheers
 
holty said:
would appreciate your honest opinion of how your finding the d500
Click to expand...

  • For my genre, which is wildlife, especially birds it is DX so I get more 'reach' than I did with the D810.
  • The AF is simply superb ... I liked Group Area-AF on the D810 as it gave more accurate focus and tracking but the D500 is streets ahead. I don't know what it is but it simply brings the best out of the lenses I have used with it (300 f4PF & 500 f4 VR), both of which appear sharper and need less micro-adjustment.
  • I love the way that the buttons can be configured ... with one hand I can use back-button focus with AF set to Group Area-AF for almost instant pick-up and solid tracking and then press a button to switch to Single Point AF for more precise focus.
  • The rear LCD screen is very clear and clean and being touch sensitive with scrolling between images or zooming in is great.
  • Images from the D500 appear cleaner to me, hard to describe but the colour is more accurate and well ... cleaner!
  • Noise is there, especially in poor conditions/heavy crops but it is easier to deal with ... it's less of a problem to deal with than my D7200 but my D810 had less issues with noise, though where it did, like the D7200, it was more difficult to deal with. At first I was concerned but after experimenting I think I have found the best way to deal with it ... there are many reviews highlighting how well the D500 copes with noise so I am sure I can improve on even the improvements I have already found. I can't see me ever using ISO 52,000 but ISO 3200 or 6400 works fine and I am sure I could easily go higher.
  • Battery life was initially shocking but it became clear that this was because I was using a Li-ion 01 battery and these are not recommended, Nikon is replacing them for new D500 owners and mine has been replaced. The battery needs 3/4 cycles before reaching full capacity.
  • My D500 has locked up twice, this is a known problem well documented by Thom Hogan and there is no resolution to date. The battery door is in a slightly different position so my universal 'L' plate covers it, annoying if you need to remove the battery ... a pain if you have a battery grip fitted.
  • I sold my D810 to get the D500 and I wouldn't go back, I think the D500 is ideal for my wildlife shooting ... for action and wildlife it is great, I wouldn't chose it specifically for landscape, portrait, weddings etc.

Hope that helps :)
 
+1 to Gramps comments.

The D810 is hard to beat as a general all rounder - it does all things well.

I used a D810 for 2 years and loved it - mainly wildlife but more recently some landscapes.

The D500 beats it hands down for any fast action photography.

I have been roped in to a wedding in a couple of weeks - that will be almost the first time the D810 has been out of its bag since I got the D500.

So - the answer depends on what you want to take photos of :)

I am lucky and have both ;)
 
Last edited:
+1 to Gramps.

The camera just does everything well, i even use it for Landscapes when I'm not bothered about that extra few inchs round the edge.....god i used M4/3 for 2 years so I'm used to the lower catchment
 
Another +1 to Gramps & Dave Semmens.

I shoot mostly birds and bugs, also lucky to have D810 and D500 and like Dave I have hardly used the D810 since acquiring the D500. AF on the D500 is better than anything I have used previously.

Noise can be there but it cleans up very well.
 
Here are a few shots that show the tracking ability of the D500.

They are large crops and converted straight to jpeg with no PP whatsoever, to show the powerful AF of the camera.

Not the easiest of subjects either:

iso 720
DSC_1356.jpg

iso 1800
DSC_19711.jpg

iso 640
DSC_1381.jpg

iso 720
DSC_1387.jpg

iso 560
DSC_1415.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nice Wez. This is what i was trying to show with the hunting dragon fly shots too.
 
Just another example of AF & Tracking, I had the good fortune to spot a juvenile Kingfisher on Monday, he was a long way away even with the 500 and 1.4 but I couldn't resist taking a shot of him ... this was the view I had of him, (full in the frame with no processing).

KF1.jpg



After just a few moments he flew away from me to the back of the lake in front of him and once I had moved to action I thought I would try to catch some further shots of him ... now bear in mind he is flying further away from me and the size of him in the frame I was pleased got the following two shots of his journey to the reeds at the back of the lake (all crops).


KF2.jpg


KF3.jpg


And finally he perched for a short while on one of the reeds.


KF4.jpg




Now I know none of these will win any prizes but hopefully it does demonstrate how even an old geezer with slow reactions can track a small bird like a Kingfisher even when it's lost in the viewfinder. :D
 
It really is a phenomenal AF system, isn't it?

I know it's meant to be exactly the same as the D5 but I've seen a few reviews saying that it's ever so slightly worse.

I think that they're just trying to justify all that extra money! :D
 
Dave Semmens said:
My current "project" is trying to get a Kingfisher in flight.

3 days in and still trying :)

I am sure the camera is up to it - but I am a bit too slow and the birds are proving elusive
Click to expand...
My mission is just to see one, let alone photograph one ;) Apparently they're in my area but they clearly hide from me :banghead: :LOL:
 
WWA said:
Where can I buy an additional battery for the D500? Wary of buying one from Wex etc and getting an 'old' model battery.
Click to expand...


Just to update this, I bought from Amazon in the end as £20 cheaper than Wex. It came and it is one of the newer battery's.
 
can I just ask regarding the noise comments,is this something that is more apparent in the later bodies,D7200 D500 because i don't recall people mentioning it much before these 2 cameras came out,why is this?
 
WWA said:
@Sootchucker Thats a great shot of the Jay. Could I ask how you went about noise reduction at that iso?
Click to expand...

WWA, thanks, much apprecaited.

I'm no expert by any means, but here's what I do (although other routines might work just as well or even better). For the High ISO images (typically ISO8000-12800) I usually process in Lightroom to taste, setting the colour profile to "Nikon Standard" (as I find the adobe profile a bit anemic). I then turn sharpening completely off in Lightroom then continue my edit in PS CC. I first create a duplicate layer then run it though the plug in - Topaz Denoise", which I've used for a few years now and does a really good job. Once that's done I create a layer mask and paint out the areas that I don't want NR to affect (typically high detail areas like feathers etc., revealing the non processed background layer.

Once I'm happy with NR, I then run though "Topaz Infocus" for final screen sharpening.

It's sounds like a faff, but to be honest it takes all of 5 minutes top. For Images up to ISO6400, I don't even use layers but rather just run a mild Topaz Denoise routine across the whole image then though Topaz Infocus for final sharpening (even quicker)
 
  • Like
Reactions: WWA
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
can I just ask regarding the noise comments,is this something that is more apparent in the later bodies,D7200 D500 because i don't recall people mentioning it much before these 2 cameras came out,why is this?
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I think it's more a case of prior to these generation cameras, no one in their right mind would push a DX camera beyond say ISO 3200. However with these newer sensors, whilst the noise its still there, it seems to be less random and blotchy, and therefore responds very well to modern NR techniques, so for instance with the D500, perfectly acceptable images can now be had up to and including ISO 12,800 with careful processing.

Of course another factor is that modern NR algorithms in the latest software packages is just more adept at controlling noise in images like never before ?
 
I've had a D7200 and I wasn't happy with the noise on that so sold it and got a D610 which handled noise better but AF and ergonomics were rubbish. So I've got the D500 now and noise is way better than the other two. Yes it's there at high iso but it's not like normal noise, is small grains and very easy to clean even with my very limited PP skills. I use auto iso and on the d500 I have the max set a lot higher than I'd ever go on the d7200 or d610 because I know it will clean up easy.

Hope that helps. Perhaps it's the recent mega pixel rises that have increased noise attention.
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
can I just ask regarding the noise comments,is this something that is more apparent in the later bodies,D7200 D500 because i don't recall people mentioning it much before these 2 cameras came out,why is this?
Click to expand...

Smaller more numerous pixels?
 
Sootchucker said:
WWA, thanks, much apprecaited.

I'm no expert by any means, but here's what I do (although other routines might work just as well or even better). For the High ISO images (typically ISO8000-12800) I usually process in Lightroom to taste, setting the colour profile to "Nikon Standard" (as I find the adobe profile a bit anemic). I then turn sharpening completely off in Lightroom then continue my edit in PS CC. I first create a duplicate layer then run it though the plug in - Topaz Denoise", which I've used for a few years now and does a really good job. Once that's done I create a layer mask and paint out the areas that I don't want NR to affect (typically high detail areas like feathers etc., revealing the non processed background layer.

Once I'm happy with NR, I then run though "Topaz Infocus" for final screen sharpening.

It's sounds like a faff, but to be honest it takes all of 5 minutes top. For Images up to ISO6400, I don't even use layers but rather just run a mild Topaz Denoise routine across the whole image then though Topaz Infocus for final sharpening (even quicker)
Click to expand...


That's for the reply, I certainly need to brush up on my PP skills. Is there a reason many of you don't just use the noise function in Lightroom?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top