Anyone using a Nikon D500?

[Wandering Sagebrush]

If so, what's your opinion? I didn't think I would go back to DX, but this is getting good reviews in the photo rags.

 

[smlobx]

I'm in the market for a new Nikon body as well and would be interested in anyone's opinions.
My primary focus is wildlife and landscapes.

 

[Happyjax]

I have a D810 and a D500. The quality of the D500 is excellent but if you are not shooting sports or birds I would suggest going full frame. If you are an all around shooting the 500 is really good and 10fps with a buffer you just can't fill is pretty cool.

Here is a link to some of the 1st eagle shots I got with the D500 and a 500 F4

https://www.flickr.com/photos/happyjax/albums/72157660678371538/with/30898806216/

 

[Wandering Sagebrush]

Nice, nice eagle shots!

 

[ski3pin]

Nice, nice eagle shots!

Yes, very nice!

 

[Happyjax]

Thanks

 

[Wandering Sagebrush]

I'm in the market for a new Nikon body as well and would be interested in anyone's opinions.
My primary focus is wildlife and landscapes.

Thinking about this for a while... I'd say if your primary goal is wildlife, the D500 is the DX camera to go for. I'd get the accessory grip as well. If you're going for landscape, the FX D810 would be my recommendation. In truth, either would do a reasonable job for you.

 

[Casa Escarlata Robles Too]

I have a D810 and a D500. The quality of the D500 is excellent but if you are not shooting sports or birds I would suggest going full frame. If you are an all around shooting the 500 is really good and 10fps with a buffer you just can't fill is pretty cool.

Here is a link to some of the 1st eagle shots I got with the D500 and a 500 F4

https://www.flickr.com/photos/happyjax/albums/72157660678371538/with/30898806216/

Fantastic eagle shots.
My favorite bird.
Thanks for posting.
Frank

 

[smlobx]

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "full frame" and what other options are there and which series are which....?

 

[Happyjax]

When film cameras went digital they copied the size of the 35mm film and created a camera. The problem was that sensors were very expensive back then so the original 35mm size was unaffordable for most. To offset the cost they created a smaller version of the 35mm sized sensor and called it a crop sensor. On Nikon cameras that is a 1.5 crop, on Canon a 1.6 crop.

I guess they needed to distinguish so they called the original size full frame and the smaller size crop or DX for Nikon.

The crop sensor has a smaller field of view so the picture seems to be magnified but as it has smaller pixel density the quality is not as good as a similar full frame sensor. Take that with a grain of salt because almost any new DX (crop) cameras will take excellent pictures and many out perform older full frame cameras.

 

[Happyjax]

Here is a chart to compare. Hope it helps

 

[Wandering Sagebrush]

To expand more on Jackie's info, one of the claims about crop factor cameras is that they have an increase in magnification over a full frame camera. What actually occurs is the image will fill more of the sensor because of its smaller size. That makes the image appear larger than it would if taken on a full frame camera. There are other variables in play, such as pixel density and pixel size.

I didn't think to ask what lenses you currently have. Full frame lenses (FX) work nicely on a DX camera, but lenses designed for DX cameras will either cause vignetting, or cause the camera to go into a DX mode. So, lens collections play a significant role in camera type decisions. My personal philosophy is to purchase full frame designed lenses regardless of what sensor type camera it is used on. Full frame lenses are typically of higher optical quality, but the down side is they cost more.

If you would like to talk, send me a pm with your phone number and I'll give you a call.

 

[smlobx]

Thank you so much guys!
I have a little research to do but want to get back into photography more now that I hope to have some more time here shortly.
I'm sure I will have more questions.

I've been fortunate to have two of my photos picked up by Nat Geo but I realize that they were lucky shots.

 

[Happyjax]

I also am of the belief that full frame lenses are the way to go. If you have a DX no sweat and if you want to add or upgrade to an FX all your lenses will work. The kit lens on a DX would be the only one I would buy and I would go body and lens separately if I had any thoughts of an FX body later

Congrats on getting some Nat Geo goodness

 

[Shadyapex]

I went from a full frame NIkon to the D500 and I don't regret it one bit. However I really only use it for bird photography. I sold all my Nikkor lenses when I went to the Fujifilm X-Pro 2 for general photography but the Fuji 100-400 just wasn't up to the AF speed that I wanted. So I picked up a used D500 and a Nikkor 200-500 and it's great. The AF is super fast and the tracking is spot on. I'd much rather have a crop sensor camera that gives me lots of keepers then a full frame that doesn't. The only drawback is high ISO quality isn't as good as with a larger sensor. But it's good enough for me as I don't shoot in low light situations much. I rarely need to use more than 2000 ISO. It's a pretty popular combination with bird photographers on a budget of $3000 or so. Did I mention that the AF is fantastic?