Move from d7200 to d500

[CarlosFrazao]

hi guys, has anyone made the move from the d7200 to the d500... Is it worth it or is it just the extra 4 frames and the buffer that make a difference, how much better is the low light as well. I'm thinking of either getting a d800 as a extra body or getting rid of the d7200 and getting a d500... Thanks guys

 

[Braineack]

Can't quite see the link between debating between a D800 or D500...

 

[CarlosFrazao]

Can't quite see the link between debating between a D800 or D500...

I was looking at the d800 for the xtra low light performance and better low noise shots. But if the d500 can get similar low light performance and noise like I have heard from some reviews then I'd rather have the faster newer camera instead of 2 different bodies

 

[goodguy]

Can't quite see the link between debating between a D800 or D500...

Exactly.
If you want overall better image quality go with full frame.
If you are a ports/wildlife shooter then get the D500

 

[goodguy]

Can't quite see the link between debating between a D800 or D500...

I was looking at the d800 for the xtra low light performance and better low noise shots. But if the d500 can get similar low light performance and noise like I have heard from some reviews then I'd rather have the faster newer camera instead of 2 different bodies

According to Tony Northop the D750 has twice the better low light performance over the D500
D750 is still the low light king (D5 is better but cost a ton of money) with the D610 slightly behind it and the D800 and D810 while good in low light are really more of studio/landscape cameras and not as good in low light.

 

[CarlosFrazao]

Can't quite see the link between debating between a D800 or D500...

I was looking at the d800 for the xtra low light performance and better low noise shots. But if the d500 can get similar low light performance and noise like I have heard from some reviews then I'd rather have the faster newer camera instead of 2 different bodies

According to Tony Northop the D750 has twice the better low light performance over the D500
D750 is still the low light king (D5 is better but cost a ton of money) with the D610 slightly behind it and the D800 and D810 while good in low light are really more of studio/landscape cameras and not as good in low light.

I don't think tony knows what he's talking about on that review as he stated they didn't have a d750 to test, so how can one give out such false ratings that one is twice as good if he didn't even test it..

 

[goodguy]

Can't quite see the link between debating between a D800 or D500...

I was looking at the d800 for the xtra low light performance and better low noise shots. But if the d500 can get similar low light performance and noise like I have heard from some reviews then I'd rather have the faster newer camera instead of 2 different bodies

According to Tony Northop the D750 has twice the better low light performance over the D500
D750 is still the low light king (D5 is better but cost a ton of money) with the D610 slightly behind it and the D800 and D810 while good in low light are really more of studio/landscape cameras and not as good in low light.

I don't think tony knows what he's talking about on that review as he stated they didn't have a d750 to test, so how can one give out such false ratings that one is twice as good if he didn't even test it..

Good question that I cant answer since I wasnt there when he did the review.
One way to explain this is by assuming he has a room with same amount of light so he can take a shot and compare it with other cameras even if he doesnt shoot as the same day. But thats just a guess of mine.
He did find the D500 better then the D7200 in low light but it wasn't a huge improvement.
The D500 took another step up in...........well everything compared to all current APS-C cameras in the market but remember it is still APS-C it just doesnt bring same amount of light onto the sensor as FF does.
I cant wait for the DXO report to see how it really compared to other DX and FX cameras.

 

[Braineack]

The D500 is a pretty purpose built sports camera.
Crazy AF module (153pts).
Crazy FPS (11fps).
Crazy Buffer (200 RAW).
EXPEED 5 image processor.
20MP DX sensor.


The D800 is a studio queen.
51pt AF module, without groupings. Known to have AF issues.
4 FPS.
16 Frame Buffer
EXPEED 3.
36MP FX sensor.

You can't even Auto-ISO in M mode with the D800.


If I could afford it, I wouldn't hesitate picking a D500 over a D7200--if that's the type of camera I needed. If I was doing studio/portrait or landscape work, I might pick the D800.

 

[Peeb]

The D500 is a pretty purpose built sports camera....


The D800 is a studio queen....

You can't even Auto-ISO in M mode with the D800.
...

Did NOT know that! Surprising to me that you cant auto-ISO such a nice camera in M.

 

[dannylightning]

the D500 is very good in low light. looks to be almost as good as full frame. some photos have been posted from the d 500 at 50 thousand iso.. it has less noise than my d7200 has at 10 thousand iso..

if your shooting wildlife the D500 is killer. here is a good thread to check out..

The Nikon D500 - Reigniting The DX / FX Debate And A Few High ISO Photos

 

[coastalconn]

The D500 is a pretty purpose built sports camera....


The D800 is a studio queen....

You can't even Auto-ISO in M mode with the D800.
...

Did NOT know that! Surprising to me that you cant auto-ISO such a nice camera in M.

Not sure where you saw that, but when I had the D800, I always shot in manual with auto-ISO and EC..

To the OP of you are planning on cropping a lot with the D800, you will see pretty much no benefit from the d800.. However, it is a fantastic camera when used as a FF. I had the D7100 and the D800 back in the day. Since I only do wildlife the D7100 was my go to camera..

 

[jaomul]

I'd like to see what is said about the d500 in a few months. If you need 10 fps its an obvious choice, if low light stuff is your priority I'd look at a d750/610 model. According to a few reviews the d500 is almost as good or as good as current fx cameras, but I wonder how much these reviewers are sponsored and what the real performance is. I am sure its great for dx, possibly the best ever, but the hype machine is running, and all things being equal, fx sensors with 24mp have bigger light catchers than 20mp on dx, with probably similar technology

 

[Derrel]

It's always great if you can get to see, touch, handle, and test two cameras either side-by-side or at different times. When comparing between two cameras, and coming from a third, different model, an actual hand-on test can sometimes make the decision easy. Or not! The D500 is a "step up" from the D7xxx line...it is a MUCH higher-grade type of machine.

In my experience, I look for the camera that I can SEE through the most easily; this can be a big difference if you wear eyeglasses, or have middle-aged eyes, and so on. Eye relief specifications can be checked, but there's nothing quite like going to a photo dealer and actually touching, examining, and test-shooting two cameras. I see the D800 and the D500 as being two entirely different types of cameras, but I get the idea of trying to buy the best $2k camera at this time. Right now, there are several really nice Nikon bodies available.

 

[Braineack]

Not sure where you saw that, but when I had the D800, I always shot in manual with auto-ISO and EC..

CRAP. it was for VIDEO. My bad. ignore me like everyone already should.

 

[jaomul]

Not sure where you saw that, but when I had the D800, I always shot in manual with auto-ISO and EC..

CRAP. it was for VIDEO. My bad. ignore me like everyone already should.

Don't be so hard on yourself. It happens, and you were trying to steer someone the right way