Received D500 today

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>I received my D500 today and had a brief amount of time this afternoon to set it up and take some sample shots. I plan to use it for high school sports, so low light performance is important. Some initial thoughts based on the little time I worked with it today is very promising. The AF speed seems to match that of my D5 as expected. It feels very solid and well built much like the D300/S. The shutter is slightly quieter than the D5. The D5 is more of a loud "clunk' sound while the D500 is a more crisp "snap" sound. I know that is subjective, but that is how I heard it. The Auto WB settings are the same as the D5 giving what I call cleaner colors when left in the default setting. The grip is slightly deeper than the D5, but still provides solid handling even for smaller hands.</p>

<p>I wanted to provide some comparison shots at ISO 6400 comparing it to the D300S and the D750 for noise. All three were shot with High ISO Noise Reduction set to Normal using a 70-200mm VR II lens at F/2.8. First I will show the full photo of each and then show close crops to view the noise better. Here is the D300S shot.</p><div></div>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>Here is the D500 shot.</p><div></div>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>And here is the D750 at ISO 6400.</p><div></div>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>Here is the D300S crop at ISO 6400.</p><div></div>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>And here is the D500 crop.</p><div></div>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>And finally the D750 crop. By the way, no additional post-processing was applied to any of the shots.</p><div></div>

[eric_arnold]

<p>looks good. thanks for posting. </p>

[nishnishant]

<p>At cropped level, the D500 looks best, followed by the D750, followed by the 300S. Thanks for the post - this sort of stuff is always good to see. </p>

[rconey]

<p>What I see is that the focus is best with the D500 shot. I am surprised how clean the D300S shadows look at iso 6400. Have fun. </p>

[Hector Javkin]

<p>To me the D500 and the D750 images are very similar at the focus plane, an impressive showing for the D500 as a DX camera. The D750 shows shallower depth of field, a result of the same magnification, same aperture, but a larger sensor.</p>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>Looking at the original files full screen the D750's noise level is slightly better than the D500, but not by as much as I thought it would be. I think the D500 will definitely be on the sideline with me this year. I will be using it for nature photography (primarily birds) in the meantime. Hector is also correct about the shallower depth of field for the D750 having some effect. I'm sure there will be some better (more scientific) comparisons on the web shortly. It will be interesting to see what they show.</p>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>I just ran a quick test on the buffer. I took out the XQD card and used only an old 4 GB Class 4 Kingston SD card that is normally used in a trail camera. At 10fps I was able to get 28 shots before it stopped completely. It then took about one minute for the buffer to finish writing to the card. I then replaced it with the newest SanDisk Extreme Pro 280 MB/s SDXC II card and was able to get 44 shots before it slowed down to 1-2 frames per second. The difference this time is that the buffer cleared almost immediately when I stopped shooting. I didn't try it with the Lexar 2933 XQD card, but I feel fairly certain it would hit the 200 shot limit using that card with no problem.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Out-of-the-camera JPGs are not really a fair comparison as newer bodies have improved dramatically as far as their JPGs go, while the sensors have only improved modestly.</p>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>Elliot, all three were shot with NEF files out of the cameras and then converted to JPGs for posting using NX-D. No further processing was performed.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>It would be interesting to see how the D500 fares against a more up-to-date DX camera like the D7200, and with like-for-like focal lengths versus the D750. For example 35mm on the D500 and 50mm on the D750, with the lenses stopped to an optimum aperture so that aberrations don't have too much influence. Or at least using the same lens at a smaller aperture than wide open.</p>

<p>I'm guessing the lens was zoomed to keep the framing the same Barry? The perspective looks identical.</p>

<p>I wouldn't expect the D7200 to come near the speed, ruggedness or handling of the D500, but I'm wondering how much better the basic IQ is, if any at all. Massive buffer size is of little interest to anyone not "spraying and praying" I would think. 10 shots in a row is usually sufficient, otherwise the flickering viewfinder makes action following a bit straining. With recycle time being more of an issue if using flash.</p>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>RJ, yes the lens was zoomed to keep the framing the same. I sold my D7200 a few days before the D500 arrived to someone who needed it for a trip, otherwise I would have used it instead of the D300S. You are correct that the deep buffer will not be of interest to a lot of people not shooting sports or BIFs. It does answer one of the consistent complaints from users of the D7xxx series though. One of the first events I used the D7000 for was a conference track meet. I was taking shots just past the finish line of competitors coming towards me during the hurdles event. I assumed incorrectly that the buffer would be similar to the D300 I had been using and missed a key portion of the race while the buffer emptied. As far as IQ I can't really say just from looking at the files that it is better or worse than the D7200, other than the cleaner colors I mentioned earlier. It is actually the first time I have gone backwards as far as megapixels, but 20 MP is plenty for my purposes. In fact I have been happy since cameras got to 12 MP. But of course I will always take more to work with, everything else being equal. My reasons for the D500 was better weather sealing, more rugged build (I sometimes don't get out of the way quickly enough on sidelines), higher frame rate and deeper buffer, and the new flicker reduction feature. Anyone who doesn't need those items will probably be happy with the D7200 and $700-$800 in their pocket.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Capture is not necessarily a program I would choose as my preferred choice to process high ISO NEFs - there are many third party programs that offer far improved results. I use software that maintains good detail and delivers noise free IQ for my high ISO images.</p>

<p>I am curious how DXO will rate the sensor... time will tell.</p>

<p>Enjoy your new body!</p>

[Barry Clemmons Photography]

<p>Elliot, I used NX-D because they had already updated for the D500. Hopefully the major packages will soon update as well. I haven't checked, but I believe Lightroom has an update that includes both the D5 and D500.</p>

[joseph_smith3]

<p>My D 500 arrived last night. After setting it up, I shot my first pictures this morning.<br /> Nikon D500 Initial Impressions<br /> 1. AF is very fast and responsive which is really good.<br /> To get accurate focus, especially where you want it, you will need to be aware of how certain settings work.<br /> To start with, I set Custom Setting a8 to AF On Only so the only way to focus is to use the AF ON button on the back of the camera. This is the way I shoot.<br>

I set both a1 and a2 to Release because I want the shutter to be activated when I depress the shutter button. Others may use other settings, but this the approach I take.<br>

A3, Focus tracking with lock on, is another important setting with new features for the D500. I think this setting will get changed often during a shoot as it will likely have to be tweaked as shooting conditions and subjects change. The options provided are different from those on a D 800 and D810. On these two bodies I usually chose Long or Off depending on backgrounds present (clear sky vs cluttered), the amount of light present, and how fast is my lens (f 2.8 vs f4 v f5.6).<br>

For a3, there are two settings, and both appear as scales. The top one is called “Blocked shot with AF Response” and its scale is Quick to Delayed. The bottom one is called Subject Motion” and it scale is Erratic to Steady. The D500 manual, p 292, provides little useful information on how to set these.<br>

<br /> Based on my test shots this morning of birds on my bird feeders, I set the second slider to Erratic as the birds were jumping around as they searched for bird seed. I experimented with the first slider and used Quick most of the time as the feeders were in shade but the background was sunlight shining on holly bushes. This resulted is frequent loss of focus. To reacquire focus, I let go of the AF ON button and reacquired focus. This happens very fast with a D500.<br>

But other settings impact sharp focus for moving subjects. You must set AF-C. And then you need to choose either S or one of the Dynamic Area AF settings. I used mostly AF-C with S or AF-C with d25. I also changed lenses to see what impact focal length or closeness to the subject had. I used a Nikon 70-200mm f4 and then a Nikon 300mm f2.8. The latter lens was too much focal length most of the time. The more the subject fills the frame the more perfect your settings and shooting technique needs to be. Moving the focus point so it is on the right spot , like the bird’s eye, is critical to getting consistent accurate focus. And the more often you can use S over d25, the sharper the focus. And you need fast shutter speeds.<br>

2. The Exposure settings are important too. Maybe it was the harsh lighting conditions, but I found that I had to use exposure compensation a lot--+.7 to +1.7—when the bird was on the feeder and the background light was stronger. I switched from Matrix metering to Center weighted and that made a big difference too. The more the subject filled the frame the less exposure compensation was needed using CW vs MM with my 300mm f2.8. I think the metering system in the D 500 is more sensitive than the ones in my D 800E and D810. I felt like I was back shooting Velvia slide film as far as getting the exposure correct in camera.<br /> That's it for now. I am going to experiment with Group and 3 D and see what effect those settings have.<br /> Joe</p>