Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: dwswager on January 09, 2016, 01:30:09 pm
-
As a former D300 shooter, few people have been as critical of Nikon as I have been concerning the lack of an upgrade in the DX format. Nikon's FX for Pros and DX for consumers strategy was proven wrong almost as soon as they implemented it. It took some 6 years to upgrade from the D300s, and they didn't start development on the D500 until 2014, but Holy Crap! Most of us would have been more than happy with a 8fps, Pro bodied D7200. Dropping a DX camera with more functionality than the D5 and the same performance level in most areas at this price point just rocks.
Assuming the D500 performs to spec and we get a reasonable bump in high ISO performance from the sensor over the D7200 (beyond just the lower pixel count advantage), this thing will fly off the shelves. My favorite Nikon comment was "AF performs better than the D4s and the same as the D5"
Sorry, I'm just beside myself giddy over this. Been waiting forever. I'll regret the lack of a pop up flash, but the D500 has massively upgraded performance and functionality over the D300 with a list price $500 less.
-
I have to say that the announcement of the D500 is a really pleasant surprise - I had given up hope that Nikon would ever release a real follow-on to the D300. I first bought a D7000 to tide me over until the "D400" was released. However, I am not a fan of the consumer bodies. Last year I finally gave up and purchased a D810, which in DX crop mode is a decent wildlife camera. However, I will probably end up rewarding their bad behavior by purchasing a D500 for wildlife and continue to use the D810 (which I love) for landscape.
-
I have to say that the announcement of the D500 is a really pleasant surprise - I had given up hope that Nikon would ever release a real follow-on to the D300. I first bought a D7000 to tide me over until the "D400" was released. However, I am not a fan of the consumer bodies. Last year I finally gave up and purchased a D810, which in DX crop mode is a decent wildlife camera. However, I will probably end up rewarding their bad behavior by purchasing a D500 for wildlife and continue to use the D810 (which I love) for landscape.
Same here. Side graded to the D7100, but never was comfortable with the Dial interface of the Ethusiast line. (Why create an upgrade barriar for you users to buy a more expensive camera?) I also have the D810 and shoot sports and wildlife in 1.2X mode to get that extra fps.
I am just stunned that they decided to give it the same processing capabiliy as the D5. They ususally use the same CAM, but not the processing capability for it. To give the D500 the same dedicated AF processing as the D5 is just awesome.
-
I'm done with SLRs, but if something like this camera had come out in 2010–12 I likely would've bought one.
-Dave-
-
I'm done with SLRs, but if something like this camera had come out in 2010–12 I likely would've bought one.
If I didn't shoot wildlife and some sports, I would seriously be considering switching to a smaller, lighter weight mirrorless system (I already have an Olympus E-M1 that I use for hiking).
-
I too moved up to a D810 when they offered the decent discount last month.
-
I haven't used a DX body for quite a few years, but I have to confess that the D500 is tempting for some applications. It's a bit like the F6, even if you don't shoot film much, it's the last body in a line and an incredibly refined tool that is pretty much a must have.
Costing hardly more than a Phaseone lens cap it seems to be excellent value. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I haven't used a DX body for quite a few years, but I have to confess that the D500 is tempting for some applications. It's a bit like the F6, even if you don't shoot film much, it's the last body in a line and an incredibly refined tool that is pretty much a must have.
Costing hardly more than a Phaseone lens cap it seems to be excellent value. ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
Sensor performance for me will be the other half of the tale. I am already assuming excellent AF peformance. I just hope comments like below pan out in real testing of production units.
"The high ISO performance of the D500 blew me away. Not only does this camera have an astounding native range – ISO 100 to 51200 — but the quality in this range is just tremendous. What Nikon has done is basically made a DX sensor that shoots in the dark like a full-frame sensor. That’s how good the high ISO image quality is."
--Todd Owyoung (http://petapixel.com/2016/01/09/i-shot-with-the-nikon-d500-here-are-my-thoughts/)
-
I like to buy after a new product has been out for a few months so I hopefully miss out on the bugs. I'm Afraid this time I will have to preorder either the D5 or the D500 and hope for the best.
-
I get the feeling Nikon will not upgrade their DX lenses as they see this more of a professional fast action long reach camera where there are plenty of primes and telephoto zooms and where making a DX version will not give a significant size advantage.
If you do want to use the D500 as the only system, Nikon needs better DX wide and normal lenses, primes and zooms. This was the reason I moved to Fuji for APS-C, lack of really good DX lenses not the bodies (my D90 remains a very good camera).
The 16-80 F2.8-4 seems a touch better than the older 16-85 but not by much.
Their only pro lens 17-55 F2.8 is slightly dated, VR at least would be nice and an updated corner performance.
DX wide and normal primes are missing in action, I only know of 35 F1.8. You could use the 24 F1.8 as it's not that big and maybe the 20 F1.8 (slightly awkward 30 mm equivalent).
Third party offers are covering more.
Right now you could have a full frame set of lenses and use the D500 as the body for action/reach and a D750/D810 as wide/normal angle and landscape body.
-
I am just stunned that they decided to give it the same processing capabiliy as the D5. They ususally use the same CAM, but not the processing capability for it. To give the D500 the same dedicated AF processing as the D5 is just awesome.
Maybe that's just an indication of how cheap respective circuitry has become.
-
Maybe that's just an indication of how cheap respective circuitry has become.
No, i don't think so. If you make a pro-DX-body you go all the way or not do it.
It has to last for three years and the competition may outclass you otherwise a moment from now.
I suspect Nikon thinks that not every pro having a D4(s) is willing/capable to upgrade to the D5 but maybe will be tempted to buy the d500.
-
No, i don't think so. If you make a pro-DX-body you go all the way or not do it.
It has to last for three years and the competition may outclass you otherwise a moment from now.
I suspect Nikon thinks that not every pro having a D4(s) is willing/capable to upgrade to the D5 but maybe will be tempted to buy the d500.
I agree.
Nikon has made a habit of making serious advents that stand the test of time.
I have been a Canon 7D shooter since I started, and I have been waiting for something to come out from Canon that appeared to be the "perfect" successor to upgrade to.
The 7DII was founded on an outdated sensor, and despite all its strengths, at the end of the day it was founded on an outdated sensor.
I have been mulling the 5DSr, but wanted 4K. (There was no reason to omit 4K, but Canon did.) I even considered the Samsung, for their 4K, but it (and others like it) were too limited.
The Nikon D500 has (literally) everything I wanted to see in a DSLR for nature photography. (Articulating/touch screen, high ISO capability, 4K, low noise, etc.)
There simply is no limitation to the D500 (like there is the Samsungs, etc.).
It is not very convenient to have to sell lenses, switch mounts, etc.
But that is exactly what I will be doing by this spring ...
Jack
-
Half the prints I sold are wildlife although I'm not really a 'wildlife shooter'. I have all the Nikon long glass I need, mostly use a D800e. A D500 would be paid for in no time just for it's autofocus and automatic focus fine tuning just to start the list of features. The last DX body I owned was a D200 and the next one will be the D500. For my typical FX applications I don't need some of those features that much.
-
I have been a Canon 7D shooter since I started, and I have been waiting for something to come out from Canon that appeared to be the "perfect" successor to upgrade to.
There simply is no limitation to the D500 (like there is the Samsungs, etc.).
It is not very convenient to have to sell lenses, switch mounts, etc.
But that is exactly what I will be doing by this spring ...
Welcome to Nikon. I am a semi-pro (ametuer that reluctantly does some paid jobs) and all the sports guys I roam sidelines with in the daytime shoot the 7D/7DmkII. At night, they disappear due to the poor sensor performance. They tell me it just isn't worth the effort.
I've been arguing to Nikon (and everyone else) that the lack of a 7D/7DmkII competitor has kept a significant number of Canon shooters from changing to Nikon costing sales of FX bodies, lenses and accessories.
I actually wish the D500 had a pop up flash. It is nice to have for a little fill when all else is impractical, to set off studio lights and to allow it to be used as a family snapshot camera. I just think a lot of people might have upgraded to D500 from D7200, but won't because they just can't give up the built in flash.
-
If you do want to use the D500 as the only system, Nikon needs better DX wide and normal lenses, primes and zooms.
I've shot DX up until I bought the D810 and the ONLY DX lens I ever owned was the relatively inexpensive 18-200mm VRII as a walk around lens.
While I agree that a superwide DX lens would be worthwhile, I can't ever understand buying DX lenses which closes off use on FX cameras. Especially considering using FX lenses on DX bodies means using only the best part of the lens (the center).
-
I've shot DX up until I bought the D810 and the ONLY DX lens I ever owned was the relatively inexpensive 18-200mm VRII as a walk around lens.
While I agree that a superwide DX lens would be worthwhile, I can't ever understand buying DX lenses which closes off use on FX cameras. Especially considering using FX lenses on DX bodies means using only the best part of the lens (the center).
If you want to stay just DX then it doesn't make sense to use the bigger FX lenses if you could get similar performance but smaller DX lenses. Not everybody wants to go full frame.
-
If you want to stay just DX then it doesn't make sense to use the bigger FX lenses if you could get similar performance but smaller DX lenses. Not everybody wants to go full frame.
I get that. If this thing is as good as some comments at high ISO, which is the big inherent weakness of smaller sensors (along with too much DOF - Did I just write that?), then more users would be able to forgo larger sensors altogether.
I will just say it took Nikon 7 years to figure out "FX for Pros/DX for consumers" was bad thinking. We shall see if D500 is just capitulation or a change in thinking by what follows.
-
If you want to stay just DX then it doesn't make sense to use the bigger FX lenses if you could get similar performance but smaller DX lenses. Not everybody wants to go full frame.
I do not agree; in general FF lenses are usually better at the sides and corners of the DX format; also there is far less vignetting.
the 20mm 1.4G nikkor will give you an excellent DX image @1.4 ( becoming a 30mm F1.4)
But I agree the weight and size is a factor.
-
I am a bit jealous now. I have a Canon system, the cost to switch would be considerable and I would be leaving some favorite lenses behind. But, I will wait until further testing to see exactly how jealous I should be. :o I would like to travel, too.
-
What i would like to know: how much noise the shutter+ mirror makes .
It was one of the key benefits of the D810- very quiet- the nikon d4 on the other hand: KLIK-KLAK!
-
I do not agree; in general FF lenses are usually better at the sides and corners of the DX format; also there is far less vignetting.
the 20mm 1.4G nikkor will give you an excellent DX image @1.4 ( becoming a 30mm F1.4)
But I agree the weight and size is a factor.
That's the principle behind the Otus, oversized image circle, right? Or some of the Sigma Arts. If you don't care about the weight it is worth it. If you choose APS-C you probably care about the weight though.
-
That's the principle behind the Otus, oversized image circle, right? Or some of the Sigma Arts. If you don't care about the weight it is worth it. If you choose APS-C you probably care about the weight though.
Unless you are interested in a DX body for any of the following reasons:
- more reach with tele lenses,
- better AF points coverafe
- more DoF with wides
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Unless you are interested in a DX body for any of the following reasons:
- more reach with tele lenses,
- better AF points coverafe
- more DoF with wides
Cheers,
Bernard
Exactly. We all get caught up in our own preferences and forget that there are others that might have preferences slightly different or even diametrically opposed to our own.
I plan to purchase a D500 and it has nothing to do with weight or size versus my D810. I will buy it for more reach and fps. The D500 and D810 will complement each other. Maybe a D910 with a 1.5x DX mode of 20MP or more and 8-10fps in DX mode could supplant them both. But even then, sometimes 2 bodies are just better than 1!
-
Unless you are interested in a DX body for any of the following reasons:
- more reach with tele lenses,
- better AF points coverafe
- more DoF with wides
Cheers,
Bernard
See what I wrote on the first post in this topic. Nikon probably bets you are one of those (long reacher and/or action shooter).
I'm not that sold on the more DOF with wides as your options will be more limited compared to FX.
Right now Nikon has you covered with lenses unless you want also a lighter all inclusive package; looking how much APS-C sells vs the FX even if just half of those have weight as a big factor that's a significant chunk that is getting ignored. Right now mirrorless is their answer (for a larger sensor high quality lighter weight package).
I have Nikon FX, DX and Fuji; I wouldn't have gotten the Fuji if Nikon was to have what I said before (high quality wide-normal primes and zooms for DX).
Considering that I put more money in the Fuji vs the Nikon FX their hope of upselling to FX failed.
-
I actually wish the D500 had a pop up flash.
I don't. I am glad Nikon omitted the auto-flash, which is another reason (for me) to switch.
I am a PI for my "day job" ... and "night job" :)
Therefore, quite often, I take photos in less-than-favorable light conditions.
Sometimes I do not have the luxury to sit there and tinker with settings, and more often than not I need to switch to "Auto" mode to capture what I can, quickly.
The AutoFlash feature is a buzz-kill ... a position-revealer ... and (at the very least) an annoyance.
It will be VERY nice to be able to switch to a camera that not only has great high ISO capability ... but that (when placed in Auto-mode) will NOT arbitrarily pop-up a $#%^&&, freaking flash when said flash is the last %^#^&* thing I need in that circumstance >:(
Jack
-
The AutoFlash feature is a buzz-kill ... a position-revealer ... and (at the very least) an annoyance.
It will be VERY nice to be able to switch to a camera that not only has great high ISO capability ... but that (when placed in Auto-mode) will NOT arbitrarily pop-up a $#%^&&, freaking flash when said flash is the last %^#^&* thing I need in that circumstance >:(
I agree, but that is an issue of the entry level cameras, at least in nikon models. No advanced/pro Nikon camera (D800, D300, etc) will auto pop-up the flash.
Personally, I use the pop-up flash only as a comander for other(s) remote flashes, never as the main light. I guess they removed the pop-up flash since they are offering a radio triggered flash.
-
I don't. I am glad Nikon omitted the auto-flash, which is another reason (for me) to switch.
I am a PI for my "day job" ... and "night job" :)
Therefore, quite often, I take photos in less-than-favorable light conditions.
Sometimes I do not have the luxury to sit there and tinker with settings, and more often than not I need to switch to "Auto" mode to capture what I can, quickly.
The AutoFlash feature is a buzz-kill ... a position-revealer ... and (at the very least) an annoyance.
I suspect the flash issue and the media card configuration will probably be the 2 areas of consternation.
There are clearly 2 camps on the flash. The first camp would not want or would not be willing to give up the increased durability and weather tightness that can be achieved by not having the flash. The other side, including me, are generalists and the flash would be a welcome addition as it is in the the D810. We use it as a trigger for other lights, for fill and it allows the camera to be used for indoor snapshots. Really no right or wrong here, just different preferences. I suspect the D810 will be my more general use shooter, in part, because of the flash. Though I also use an SB-800 on a RRS Flip bracket.
BTW, Agree on pop-up flash! I hate auto flash even on my phone!
As to the cards, CF is clearly going to get killed. I would have preferred 2 SD cards slots or 1SD/1CF like the D810. However, XQD is a likely future standard. With the buffer on the D500, I suspect very few people will actually need XQD speed to get the buffer flushed, but it will be handy for those that shoot that type of image bursts.
-
Hopefully the omitted flash means:
a stronger body, but more important a better prisma/viewfinder.
-
https://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/01/DSCF4969.jpg
Imagine that with a pop up flash, away goes strength and in comes a large sealing requirement.
Have Nikon ever made a single digit Pro model with a built in flash?
-
https://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/01/DSCF4969.jpg
Imagine that with a pop up flash, away goes strength and in comes a large sealing requirement.
Have Nikon ever made a single digit Pro model with a built in flash?
No they have not!
-
No they have not!
Exactly!! ;)
( and no one moaned about the lack either)
Well I'm sure on the web someone has :o
-
I actually wish the D500 had a pop up flash. It is nice to have for a little fill when all else is impractical, to set off studio lights and to allow it to be used as a family snapshot camera. I just think a lot of people might have upgraded to D500 from D7200, but won't because they just can't give up the built in flash.
You don't realize how useful a pop-up flash is until it's not there.
It's just stupid not to have it!! What's the thinking here - price point? - misguided "pro" attitudes/snobbery? It just doesn't make sense in this day and age to leave out a pop-up flash.
I have "only" a semi-pro D800E and it has a pop-up. I don't use it for nature photography or more my serious work, but if an interior or a small group of people outdoors need just a little pop, it's there. It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing. Yes, I also have a "proper" Nikon flash, but use it only in more formal settings when I know the pop-up just won't cut it.
-
The D500 is a DX format D5 and it's not targeted to the same people who would buy a D7x00.
The lack of popup flash makes it possible to have a better viewfinder (as well as more space for the new AF module straight out of an FX body) and more rugged body. If you don't need those features, the D7200 is still a perfectly good camera.
Also, I don't know how you people work to need the pop up so desperately, but remote triggers do exist and work way better (no issues with line of sight and lighting), and both my pop ups on D200 and D7000 cast ugly shadows whenever I put a hood on a lens (so every time, even the 50mm AF-D rubber hood blocks them). Again, there are solutions and alternatives on top of the fact that the D500 is NOT a camera for everyone.
-
The D500 is a DX format D5 and it's not targeted to the same people who would buy a D7x00.
The lack of popup flash makes it possible to have a better viewfinder (as well as more space for the new AF module straight out of an FX body) and more rugged body. If you don't need those features, the D7200 is still a perfectly good camera.
Also, I don't know how you people work to need the pop up so desperately, but remote triggers do exist and work way better (no issues with line of sight and lighting), and both my pop ups on D200 and D7000 cast ugly shadows whenever I put a hood on a lens (so every time, even the 50mm AF-D rubber hood blocks them). Again, there are solutions and alternatives on top of the fact that the D500 is NOT a camera for everyone.
It's no skin off my nose - just a warning to those who are considering buying the D500.
You can argue it anyway you want but not having a pop-up flash is more poor design and an attempt to make the camera appear more professional. Having a pop-up is not desperation! I shoot with a D800E with pop-up that is used infrequently, but when it's used, it is helpful. As I said, I have a full sized Nikon flash, but often, it is overkill. The pop-up is, dare I say, convenient, whether you are a pro or not.
Besides, it doesn't matter who the camera is marketed to, it's new and it's sexy and there are far more non-pros who will buy it - only to realize too late how useful a pop-up flash can be.
-
Sorry I didn't make it clear. I'm saying it wasn't about making the camera look professional, it's about clear design choices that compromise having the pop up flash with having better weather sealing and more space for the pentaprism and electronics inside. They considered their target market and went with this choice.
-
The D500 is a DX format D5 and it's not targeted to the same people who would buy a D7x00.
Then it would have been named the DX5. It is a semi-pro level camera on par with the D810. And no, the D7200 does not have enough shutter box speed or buffer for a reasonable frame rate. It tops out at 6fps in JPEG or 5fps at 14bit NEF. Though it is a great value in a camera.
The lack of popup flash makes it possible to have a better viewfinder (as well as more space for the new AF module straight out of an FX body) and more rugged body. If you don't need those features, the D7200 is still a perfectly good camera.
Also, I don't know how you people work to need the pop up so desperately, but remote triggers do exist and work way better (no issues with line of sight and lighting), and both my pop ups on D200 and D7000 cast ugly shadows whenever I put a hood on a lens (so every time, even the 50mm AF-D rubber hood blocks them). Again, there are solutions and alternatives on top of the fact that the D500 is NOT a camera for everyone.
I understand the design trade offs. My point is that there are 2 very distinct camps would like a lot of the functionality this camera offers and is not available elsewhere in the Nikon line. One side doesn't really want the flash anyway and are very much in favor of the other features they gain without it. On the other side are those that will miss the flash if they buy the D500 or will miss the loss of other functionality if they go with the D7200. No real right or wrong here, but I know a number of amateurs that will likely continue with the D7200 because they own only 1 DSLR body and use it for family snapshots. Had the D500 had the flash, it would have been my family photo shooter, but since it does not, I will probably use the D810.
-
It's no skin off my nose - just a warning to those who are considering buying the D500.
You can argue it anyway you want but not having a pop-up flash is more poor design and an attempt to make the camera appear more professional. Having a pop-up is not desperation! I shoot with a D800E with pop-up that is used infrequently, but when it's used, it is helpful. As I said, I have a full sized Nikon flash, but often, it is overkill. The pop-up is, dare I say, convenient, whether you are a pro or not.
Besides, it doesn't matter who the camera is marketed to, it's new and it's sexy and there are far more non-pros who will buy it - only to realize too late how useful a pop-up flash can be.
That's your opinion.
I don't think the designers wanted the D500 to "appear" more professional, but to be more professional.
Pros use external flashes which they configure optimally. It is actually amateurs who use pop-up flashes ...
Which brings us to the another point: external flashes are not "overkill" if you adjust them to minimize the output.
Of course, we all have different shooting styles/needs, but for me, when I often need to go to Full Auto mode, and get a quick shot, the pop-up flash is nothing but an annoyance.
I would say the annoyance/useful factor of a pop-up flash is 100/1 for the way I shoot.
Even when I shoot nature photography, I rarely use flash.
I also believe the viewfinder has been enlarged, thanks to not having the pop-up flash.
I don't expect to convince you, if your own style of shooting prefers pop-up flashes; I just think it's incorrect to say that Nikon is wanting the D500 to "appear" professional ... I think, based on ALL of the wonderful, needed/desired specs that have been put on this camera, that even Ray Charles can see that Nikon's goal is to make the D500 for professionals (who don't need the bulk of the D5, but who want the same basic feature set).
Jack
-
I think that with coming of DSLR, most of us have assumed that a flash is a necessity. I cannot recall a single SLR that came with a built in flash, and we managed perfectly.
Any way both D500 and D5 have a commander mode that will trigger external flash(s), so where is the problem? The inbuilt flash is quite a low power one good for very close distance shooting only.
-
What i would like to know: how much noise the shutter+ mirror makes .
It was one of the key benefits of the D810- very quiet- the nikon d4 on the other hand: KLIK-KLAK!
Not sure if this is totally helpful, but an indication. I love the rather quiet shutter of my D810!
Youtube Video/Audio of D500 10FPS Shooting (https://youtu.be/Jx1Vvv6eSAs)
-
I think that with coming of DSLR, most of us have assumed that a flash is a necessity. I cannot recall a single SLR that came with a built in flash, and we managed perfectly.
Any way both D500 and D5 have a commander mode that will trigger external flash(s), so where is the problem? The inbuilt flash is quite a low power one good for very close distance shooting only.
Mr Usta is dead! Just because we did without something 30 years ago, doesn't mean I want to do without it now. 30 years ago, I didn't have a cell phone either.
As I understand it, the D5 and D500 commander mode only works with the SB-5000 and newer flash. A solution to future problems, but not current ones.
There is no correct answer to this whole flash question. It was a design choice made for both product and marketing reasons. Nikon shooters will get comparable or better performance than the Canon 7DmkII without the sensor penalty. This D500 will sell like hotcakes.
"Although aimed at ‘advanced enthusiasts and professional photographers’, amateurs may have to wait to get hold of the 20.9-million-pixel camera when
it goes on sale in March, priced £1,729.99 (body only). ‘Due to the anticipated high demand for this new flagship DX DSLR, we will be prioritising pre-orders placed by Nikon Professional Services members and Nikon Professional Users,’ said Simon Iddon, head of product management at Nikon UK."
-
I cannot recall a single SLR that came with a built in flash, and we managed perfectly.
The N6006 had a built-in pop up flash. Although it was classified as a consumer camera body, it was very popular with photo journalists. I had two N6006 bodies before the N90s and then the F5. I never missed the pop up flash with film, but with DSLRs I've used it as a commander. I'd rather have the better view finder.
-
I can imagine a built-in flash can be extremely useful; just to have it when you suddenly need it.
It will work well enough in a lot of situations and permits you to leave the clumsy SB-5000 off the camera.
I may not be very strong but than you can use iso 3200 (or more) and it will do the job.
-
I can imagine a built-in flash can be extremely useful; just to have it when you suddenly need it.
It will work well enough in a lot of situations and permits you to leave the clumsy SB-5000 off the camera.
I may not be very strong but than you can use iso 3200 (or more) and it will do the job.
Raising ISO affects overall light level, not the light balance! You would be amazed at the difference of a indoor candid between just a raising of the ISO and the addition of a little flash to shift the balance to the subjects versus the background. Too much can be garish, though.
-
I would most definitely rather have the larger viewfinder. Depending on how good the viewfinder is I will buy the D500 or not. If it is large enough I will certainly get one..
-
Raising ISO affects overall light level, not the light balance! You would be amazed at the difference of a indoor candid between just a raising of the ISO and the addition of a little flash to shift the balance to the subjects versus the background. Too much can be garish, though.
Although my D810 and D800E have built-in flash, I very rarely use them. The main problem with them is that, unless one is using a very short prime or w/a lens without a hood, the central position of the built-in flash is such that the lens casts a shadow over the lower part of the image. Even a fairly "standard" zoom such as the 24-70mm f/2.8 gets in the way of the flash.
-
Although my D810 and D800E have built-in flash, I very rarely use them. The main problem with them is that, unless one is using a very short prime or w/a lens without a hood, the central position of the built-in flash is such that the lens casts a shadow over the lower part of the image. Even a fairly "standard" zoom such as the 24-70mm f/2.8 gets in the way of the flash.
Even on my D3300, I can use the inbuilt flash with "Slim" lenses, or for distant objects, as a fat or long lens obstructs the flash to area above the lens. So for macro and with longish lenses I have to use the external flash (in this case SB800).
My SLR never had a flash and I am used to having an external one. While an inbuilt flash is a nice thing to have, its omission is not a deal breaker in my opinion.
-
Although my D810 and D800E have built-in flash, I very rarely use them. The main problem with them is that, unless one is using a very short prime or w/a lens without a hood, the central position of the built-in flash is such that the lens casts a shadow over the lower part of the image. Even a fairly "standard" zoom such as the 24-70mm f/2.8 gets in the way of the flash.
First, the D500 has 100% viewfinder coverage with a 1.0x magnification.
And yes, I have been caught by the lens hood on the 24-70mm f/2.8 when using the pop up flash of the D810. Take the lens hood off and all is well. Usually not a big deal, especially inside.
But we are talking a DX body here which means one will usually be using lenses proportionally smaller in both length and diameter due to the 1.5x crop. I plan to buy the D500 and pair with my D810. That it doesn't have a pop up flash is a disappointment to me, but certainly not enough to make me drop down to the D7200 with it's dial interface, 5fps at 14bit and smaller buffer. I also hope to see some small increase in sensor performance from the D500 over the D7200.
-
But we are talking a DX body here which means one will usually be using lenses proportionally smaller in both length and diameter due to the 1.5x crop. I plan to buy the D500 and pair with my D810. That it doesn't have a pop up flash is a disappointment to me, but certainly not enough to make me drop down to the D7200 with it's dial interface, 5fps at 14bit and smaller buffer. I also hope to see some small increase in sensor performance from the D500 over the D7200.
Which DX lenses are you talking about? The normal/wide ones?
-
"Although aimed at ‘advanced enthusiasts and professional photographers’, amateurs may have to wait to get hold of the 20.9-million-pixel camera when
it goes on sale in March, priced £1,729.99 (body only). ‘Due to the anticipated high demand for this new flagship DX DSLR, we will be prioritising pre-orders placed by Nikon Professional Services members and Nikon Professional Users,’ said Simon Iddon, head of product management at Nikon UK."
The "Nikon Professional Dealer" with whom I have placed a pre-order phoned yesterday to ask if I had an NPS number. No I replied I've never bothered joining, but I quoted the above. Interesting he said that's going to be fun to police, they just asked us to find out and didn't say why or what to do other than give them the answer of how many were NPS so far. I'll say no NPS but Pro and see where that takes us we can't see ourselves skipping the first 20 on the list who have been on since January say because No21 has an NPS number and ordered two days ago.
-
Which DX lenses are you talking about? The normal/wide ones?
I was talking in general, considering the 1.5X crop of the DX sensor where the crop makes a 24mm into a 35mm. I have only ever owned 1 DX lens (18-200mm VR II). I always new I would use both FX and DX cameras and was not willing to duplicate lenses for both sensor formats.
Bottomline is that pop up flash has lots of limitations, but they also have a lot of benefits. They don't solve all problems, but help with some. There really isn't a definitive right or wrong answer to should the D500 have a pop up flash. It's not like you look at the camera without it and think they screwed up. It was a product and marketing decision. The express target audience clearly would prefer not to have. The question to be answered later is whether Nikon picked the correct target audience. That is, would overall profit been higher with the pop up flash or higher without it.
-
I think that with coming of DSLR, most of us have assumed that a flash is a necessity. I cannot recall a single SLR that came with a built in flash, and we managed perfectly.
Towards the end of the film SLR era, most of them came with built-in pop-up flash – but not the high end "professional" models that you are probably thinking of. I rarely use flash, and never multiple flash setups, so will stay out of the debate about using pop-up flash to trigger other flash units vs doing that by radio control (does the latter have a potential lock-in to using flash units of the same brand as the camera?)
-
Sorry guys, I'm still not getting it. This starting to sound like the first arguements against having a camera in a cell phone. Why would you want that? It can't be very good! I'm not saying a pop-up is very good, nor am I saying it's a necessity but it is convenient!
BTW, I just checked the side-by-side specs of the D500 and D300S. While the D500 has all the techno-wonder one would expect from a class-leading camera seven years newer – improved sensor (=mp+ISO+DR), buffer (duh, let's add $5 more memory) and spectacular AF – the viewfinder only increases from 0.94x to 1.0x and Nikon ditches the pop-up flash that was on the D300S.
Now my math and physics aren't as sharp as many here, so forgive me if I'm off here, but a D8xx viewfinder is "only" 0.7x magnification of a view that is 1.5x larger to begin with. Wouldn't that put it at about the same size, give or take as the D300S and D500? So I'm having a little trouble believing the arguement that Nikon had to trade-off pop-up flash for a significantly better viewfinder. While I recognize 1.0x will be an advantage over 0.94x, I can't imagine it's enough of a difference to ditch the pop-up.
My guess is that it was a price-point thing: Nikon chose not to increase the size of the top shell of the viewfinder by a few millimetres to accommodate both a (slightly) improved viewfinder (0.94x to 1.0x) and a pop-up. I still maintain, though, that this smells more of an "optics" decision to make the D500 "appear" more professional, even though most would agree it's not the camera that makes the pro (except for wanna-bes), but what one does with the camera.
Different strokes for different stokes, I guess (said scratching my head).
-
It was done first and foremost for the improved weather sealing. The D500 is on par with the D5, while the D300s was a step lower in that regard. Weather sealing the pop up flash would've been quite difficult and it would've been a weak point in the structure anyway, so they ditched it. The additional space was then used to improve the viewfinder.
If you look at the D500 as a wildlife, sports and concert camera you can clearly see why the removal of the flash has no impact to such uses. The top of the line D models have never had one either, and no one whined so much about it. Hell, just look at Canon's lineup. And what about top Olympus models?
It's called D500, but that's just a name. As I said before, this is a DX sized D5 without the vertical grip. It can be used for everything, of course, but it's designed first and foremost for more demanding tasks and some things had to be sacrificed to improve other aspects of it.
If you can't take my word, just read the official microsite http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/d500/ (http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/microsite/d500/):
Meet the D500: it's a compact powerhouse fusing the highest performance of Nikon's
professional D5 with the unique agility of the DX format
Unique benefits of DX format: compact,
lightweight system offers outstanding agility with
telephoto advantage
I don't understand why so many are still missing the point of this camera.
-
I think what's happening is this is a new camera that Nikon users have been waiting for and they have a need to discuss it. There's not a lot of new information to talk about. We've discussed everything we can. And so we wind up flailing about at the dead-horse pop up flash. I for one wish that there was more real information that could help us make valuable decisions about this camera or the D5. But it's yet two months until release and few people have had their hands on one so we talk about what we can.
-
If you look at the D500 as a wildlife, sports and concert camera you can clearly see why the removal of the flash has no impact to such uses ... but it's designed first and foremost for more demanding tasks and some things had to be sacrificed to improve other aspects of it.
...
I don't understand why so many are still missing the point of this camera.
Good post.
I don't think most people really understand the difference wildlife photography ... and taking photos in their backyard.
-
I don't think most people really understand the difference wildlife photography ... and taking photos in their backyard.
Of course, we understand the difference. Our point is why have a camera that can do only one of those things. Having the flash does not preclude using the D500 for sports and wildlife, but without it, it does preclude shooting snapshots inside of your kid putzing around.
I've shot N90s, D300, D7100 and D7200 in the rain for both sports and wildlife. I've used them bare, with cheap Opt/Tech baggies and dedicated rain sleeves. Never an issue.
As to positioning, I think the original post title says it all. They are admitting that pros want a DX body and have offered it to them without actually having to call it the Dx5 and admitting they were wrong.
-
The D500 is the successor to the D2X/D2h, not the D200 or D300 often named in such discussions.
I know the naming and lack of vertical grip confuse a lot of people, but Nikon probably wanted to repeat the D3/D300 success as well as making a smaller body to make DX a more compact solution to the full frame D5 beast.
-
Of course, we understand the difference. Our point is why have a camera that can do only one of those things. Having the flash does not preclude using the D500 for sports and wildlife, but without it, it does preclude shooting snapshots inside of your kid putzing around.
I don't think you do.
Creating a larger viewfinder, by removing the pop-up flash, increases the ability to "see" through the viewfinder, a vital element to nature photography.
Taking a photo of your kid "putzing around" is hardly "professional imagery" ... which is why the D7000 is perfect for those kind of owners.
That the D500 removes the pop-up flash, paying no heed to amateurs trying to take a photo of their kid "putzing around" only underscores its target market: pros, not amateurs.
I've shot N90s, D300, D7100 and D7200 in the rain for both sports and wildlife. I've used them bare, with cheap Opt/Tech baggies and dedicated rain sleeves. Never an issue.
All amateur cameras ...
As to positioning, I think the original post title says it all. They are admitting that pros want a DX body and have offered it to them without actually having to call it the Dx5 and admitting they were wrong.
I think Nikon responded to the calling of its fans, and resurrected the D3s, inflated it beyond anyone's expectations, and flushed all the traces of "amateur" down the drain with its specifications.
It is simply a lightweight, PRO DSLR ... with nothing amateur about it.
So if the thought of losing a pop-up flash hurts anyone, they should stick to the D7000.
-
The N90s was a professional body. It lapped the F4 in a number of areas. It was named the F90x in Europe. It was a robust body and did not have a pop-up flash. I'm convinced now that everyone has run out of discussion material.
-
Two questions: Why not a built in flash commander (but no actual flash)? That covers many of the uses people are talking about (although not the kids putzing in the backyard). I've never seen a camera (from any maker) that includes one, apart from medium format, and I've always been mystified by the omission. If it was an optical commander, there would need to be a window in the body somewhere (and the D500 doesn't have an AF illluminator, whose window would do just fine - modern high power LEDs can put a lot of light (even IR) out a little hole). An RF commander wouldn't require a visible hole, but would require the antenna to have SOME non-metallic egress (under the top display?) Through the lens mount initially seems obvious, but could be blocked pretty easily by a 600 mm f4!
The second question I've had is "why no high resolution version of either the D5 or the D500"? There is an obvious sensor problem for the D500 - no production sensor enough higher resolution to be worthwhile. There are rumors floating around of a Sony 36 MP APS-C sensor, but also hints that it might not be a great performer if it exists. The A6100 has been delayed several times, and Fuji executives, asked "why 24 MP" about the X-Pro 2 have hinted that they looked at higher resolution options and didn't like them as much. This could simply be the Samsung 28 MP sensor (which I'm almost sure is for sale to any camera maker who wants it), but it could also mean that Fuji had a look at the 36 MP sensor and didn't like what they saw.
A sensor appropriate for a D5x DOES exist - the A7rII sensor would be an excellent choice. It's not a whole lot higher resolution than a D810, but it is a better performer overall, and it would satisfy folks wanting a big-body "x" camera. I don't know why we haven't seen a Sony 54 MP full-frame sensor anywhere - it's easy to do (take the 24 MP APS-C sensor and make a full-frame version of it), and that 24 MP sensor has been a great performer for a while, but the reports coming from photographers who've used the latest version in pre-production X-Pro 2 bodies (which is at least a full sensor generation ahead of any other version of the Sony 24 MP APS-C sensor) are simply stunning (it doesn't seem to give ANYTHING up to 24 MP full-frame). A 54 MP full-frame sensor based on the X-Pro 2 sensor would cause some trepidation at Phase One headquarters in Copenhagen (not to mention increased Alka-Seltzer sales in the immediate vicinity of Canon HQ)...
-
I think you ask yourself too much questions, Dan.
Whatever we want, anyway, things are what they are. Just just wait and see and continue to use what you have and buy what you need. The market is so complete today that everything seems possible.
-
I don't think you do.
Creating a larger viewfinder, by removing the pop-up flash, increases the ability to "see" through the viewfinder, a vital element to nature photography.
Taking a photo of your kid "putzing around" is hardly "professional imagery" ... which is why the D7000 is perfect for those kind of owners.
That the D500 removes the pop-up flash, paying no heed to amateurs trying to take a photo of their kid "putzing around" only underscores its target market: pros, not amateurs.
I think Nikon responded to the calling of its fans, and resurrected the D3s, inflated it beyond anyone's expectations, and flushed all the traces of "amateur" down the drain with its specifications.
The Nikon D300/D300s replacement was the most talked about camera in the history of Nikon cameras! The D300/D300s was wildly popular precisely because it appealed to both amateurs and professionals. The D500 is the closest thing to that replacement as we can get. They gave us more performance than one would have expected and removed the flash.
For people who don't know Nikon or foolishly think the D500 is a D2h or D3s replacement, I hate to break this news. If that was the case, it would have been called the Dx5, would look almost identical to the D5, would have the same level of durability and reliability (Nikon's main definition of professional) as the D5 and would have a selling price of around $5000. You have to remember, Nikon doesn't want to have a professional DX camera!
Don't take my word for it, take Nikon's word: Nikon Enthusiast Line of Cameras (http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/dslr-cameras/enthusiast-dslrs.page) w/ D500 front and center! I'm actually surpised they do list the D810 and D810A as professional cameras since they violate the durability and reliability parameter.
I will add that I suspect the flash was removed because a lot of professionals wanted a DX sensor camera and Nikon is currently not intending to release a Dx5 for them. That is why the D500 has a lot of pro features (No flash, 10 pin terminal, Button Interface body, round eyepiece, etc), but is marketed as Enthusiast.
-
Why not a built in flash commander (but no actual flash)?
This should've been the center of the argument from the start. The D500 could've used the integrated wireless commander like the D5 has. I assume it was skipped to save some money, but frankly Nikon should've made it part of the camera to make their new wireless flash system a viable alternative without the need for bits sticking out from the left side.
The second question I've had is "why no high resolution version of either the D5 or the D500"?
They have the D8x0 line for high resolution (but slower workflow) cameras. The D5 has always been about speed and low light quality. The D500 mirrors that, being also lower in resolution than other DX bodies but having (at least on paper) much higher and cleaner ISO ratings. This also shows that they are not targeted to every market but specific jobs, despite the fact that you can use them for whatever.
The Nikon D300/D300s replacement was the most talked about camera in the history of Nikon cameras! The D300/D300s was wildly popular precisely because it appealed to both amateurs and professionals. The D500 is the closest thing to that replacement as we can get. They gave us more performance than one would have expected and removed the flash.
There is still a lot of confusion.
The D500 is not a successor to the D3s, it's a successor to the once top of the line DX cameras that were replaced with full frame ones after the D3.
Nikon used to push DX real hard, but the lack of proper DX lenses made professionals demand for a full frame camera to fully utilize all the full frame lenses available. We still lack a full DX lens lineup because after the D3 introduction Nikon basically regarded DX as amateur stuff.
But professionals wanted DX for reach and size, so they turned around again and released the D500.
As for the positioning, you can't take what the Nikon USA website classify as the ultimate proof. The D500 marketing material states that it is a professional camera. Nikon USA groups them up by price. Nikon Europe website has the D500 fall under the professional label (go here http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/products/category_pages/digital_cameras/category_SLR.page? (http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/products/category_pages/digital_cameras/category_SLR.page?) and in Narrow By: select Professional under Photography level). The global Nikon website doesn't even make a distinction between levels, but they state it is a professional camera in press releases and the official microsite.
There will never be a Dx5. Nikon will never name a camera this way, they have a different naming scheme and this would sound just too confusing to customers. They went for D500 because it was available and people were expecting the D400 already, so they wanted to capitalize on that. They could've called it "The second coming" for all we care, it won't change what the camera actually is and what it is not.
There D300 successor so many were waiting will never come. The market has changed and Nikon is going in a different direction. As I said before, the closest thing this D500 gets to is the D2x/D2h line, with the vertical grip removed to emphasize the portability of the crop sensor cameras compared to the full frame alternative (D5).
Quoting again the official Nikon description of this camera because I have to hit this nail in the head a lot harder than I thought:
Meet the D500: it’s a compact powerhouse fusing the highest performance of Nikon’s professional D5 with the unique agility of the DX format. Portable and powerful, the D500 will galvanize the way you shoot stills and video.
-
As for the positioning, you can't take what the Nikon USA website classify as the ultimate proof. The D500 marketing material states that it is a professional camera. Nikon USA groups them up by price. Nikon Europe website has the D500 fall under the professional label (go here http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/products/category_pages/digital_cameras/category_SLR.page? (http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/products/category_pages/digital_cameras/category_SLR.page?) and in Narrow By: select Professional under Photography level). The global Nikon website doesn't even make a distinction between levels, but they state it is a professional camera in press releases and the official microsite.
There D300 successor so many were waiting will never come. The market has changed and Nikon is going in a different direction. As I said before, the closest thing this D500 gets to is the D2x/D2h line, with the vertical grip removed to emphasize the portability of the crop sensor cameras compared to the full frame alternative (D5).
Bottomline: It doesn't matter. I've always found Nikon USA's Professional, Enthusiast, Consumer branding stupid. The D500 will sell like mad with respect to other cameras. That is because it meets the needs of professionals wanting a professional DX body and the D300/D300s update crowd. That it might tilt a little more one way or the other is immaterial. Nikon obviously believes they can fulfill this slot with 1 camera rather than having a strictly professional DX body (with identical specs to the D5) and a lesser body targeted at the 7DmkII. They might be right since I am of the D300 update crowd and will own the D500.
All I know is a lot of us in various segments are doing a very happy dance!
-
interesting pointers: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/desirable-dx-lenses-accordi.html