NikonGear'23

Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Frode on January 18, 2021, 22:31:15

Title: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 18, 2021, 22:31:15
For those of you that have used the D5 for "a longer" time, what experiences regarding exposure, AF, or others, do you think is worth mentioning?

Right after a release there's often many opinions regarding "this and that", also by people who have not tried the product  :). So for you that have used the camera over a longer period, what do you say?

Thanks!
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: MFloyd on January 19, 2021, 06:13:58
Had two D5; first on March 30, 2016 and the last sold mid-December 2020. One body has been replaced by a D6 in June last year. What to say ? Excellent body, but the D6 does everything better.

NB: your question is so broad that I’m afraid you will have very few replies. Be more specific.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 19, 2021, 07:57:44
Had two D5; first on March 30, 2016 and the last sold mid-December 2020. One body has been replaced by a D6 in June last year. What to say ? Excellent body, but the D6 does everything better.

NB: your question is so broad that I’m afraid you will have very few replies. Be more specific.

Thank you  :).

Regarding exposure, I’m thinking about the dynamic range at low iso and how to deal with it - any adjustment in camera? Or is it not a «problem»?

Regarding AF; any mode you prefer for different type of scenarios? What settings (focus lock- on)? Or does the renommended settings from Nikon (pro pdf) do the trick?
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: MFloyd on January 19, 2021, 08:09:43
Re dynamic range (DR) I had never a problem, and I’m very often photographing dynamic situations. I know this has been mentioned i.e. even a lower DR than the D4s. For your info, I have also a D850, a good benchmark.

For the second question, this largely depends what you are photographing. I’m a sport photographer very active in car racing. Grouped AF is my most used one. But I know a person, very proficient in bird photography, using Auto mode as his favorite.

Sample:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49770352071_e696d0e92f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iQ34Gt)
_D566202.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2iQ34Gt)
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 19, 2021, 09:04:27
Re dynamic range (DR) I had never a problem, and I’m very often photographing dynamic situations. I know this has been mentioned i.e. even a lower DR than the D4s. For your info, I have also a D850, a good benchmark.

For the second question, this largely depends what you are photographing. I’m a sport photographer very active in car racing. Grouped AF is my most used one. But I know a person, very proficient in bird photography, using Auto mode as his favorite.

Sample:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49770352071_e696d0e92f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iQ34Gt)
_D566202.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2iQ34Gt)

Nice picture  :)!

I bought a D5 a while ago, but for different reasons I traded it in for a D850 after a short while.

D850 is a great camera (!), but now my use benefit from the D5 and it’s better AF (locks and tracks better in my opinion). Therefore my questions  :).

I’ve read that some have fine tuned the exposure modes (- 1/3) in order to cope with the reduced DR (tend to overexpose the highlights by default (?). I understand the D5 does not have invariant iso, so ETTR?

Re AF; BIF and football. Sudden and unpredictably  movements.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: MFloyd on January 19, 2021, 12:22:44
Nice picture  :)!

I bought a D5 a while ago, but for different reasons I traded it in for a D850 after a short while.

D850 is a great camera (!), but now my use benefit from the D5 and it’s better AF (locks and tracks better in my opinion). Therefore my questions  :).

I’ve read that some have fine tuned the exposure modes (- 1/3) in order to cope with the reduced DR (tend to overexpose the highlights by default (?). I understand the D5 does not have invariant iso, so ETTR?

Re AF; BIF and football. Sudden and unpredictably  movements.

Thx ☺️.

When I bought the D850, it was initially meant to become a non-sport camera body. In the end, it proved to be a very capable sport camera, with the advantage to have a large pixel count, excellent for large view pictures. Though, it is not entirely a competitor in terms of AF or high ISO. Last year situation was that I was carrying three bodies: a D5 and a D850 as frontliners, and a third D5 body as backup.

With regard to ETTR matters, I have never been a big fan (maybe wrongfully) of this method and prefer to rely on the exposure data from the camera eventually corrected by ⅓ stop, plus or minus. Further I believe the D5 is largely ISO invariant.

To summarize: the eventual corrections / fine tuning of my photography is largely dictated by the (demanding) working environment; so that further fine tuning / considerations with regard to ETTR or ISO invariancy is not so relevant for me.

Your last question: you should select under a3 the two parameters which fit the best for the type of activity you are picturing. For my main activity, AF reaction is put on medium, while subject movement is on stable (exact terms might differ, as I’m translating back from my French manual).
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on January 19, 2021, 17:37:59
While the D5 does not have very good dynamic range at low ISO, it does have excellent high ISO dynamic range. D850 low to medium ISO images are smoother and more editable, but I've always preferred the D5/6's high ISO tonal and color quality (and now D6's). In practice I have not felt the D5's low ISO DR to be an issue but I've always had other cameras to shoot scenes with high lighting contrast when image quality has been a higher priority than catching the shot.

With regards to AF, the D5 can achieve a higher percentage of focus keepers when photographing approaching subjects with fast primes such as 105/1.4 and 200/2 compared to D850. However, with the 70-200/2.8 FL, I've felt both cameras are excellent. I used the D5 when I really needed to catch the shot with no margin for error. The D6 makes catching the shot especially with human subjects really easy.

The D5 viewfinder is easier to use for action subjects as it is easier to see the frame edges and corners while shooting from slightly awkward angles than the D850 which is a bit tight for me and requires really optimal positioning of the eye behind the ocular to see into corners. During long shoots I find the D5 more comfortable. The D6 viewfinder also has this extra eye relief.

I nowadays use the D850 for landscape, close-ups and similar subjects that don't move and shoot the moving subjects in most cases with the D6, which has a delightful AF system and a lower-pitched sound so enjoy it more. And so many user-friendly features that make shooting easier and more refined (such as a glove mode for touch screen, custom group area with face priority and a high degree of customizability, and connectivity).

For large prints, the D850 delivers impeccably detailed images. As mentioned before, at medium-high to really high ISO, I prefer the outcome from the D5/6.

I have several build quality issues with the D850. My D850's multi-selector is not as tactile-responsive as those of the integrated vertical grip models and sometimes with gloves on, I struggle with it. The vertical grip-body joint is not as rigid as I'd like; this can be an issue for tripod-based macro work. The D5/6 don't have any such problems. Mounting the 90 degree viewfinder attachment to D5/6 is a breeze as one just slides it in (assuming you have an extra eyepiece attachment).
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 19, 2021, 22:24:57
While the D5 does not have very good dynamic range at low ISO, it does have excellent high ISO dynamic range. D850 low to medium ISO images are smoother and more editable, but I've always preferred the D5/6's high ISO tonal and color quality (and now D6's). In practice I have not felt the D5's low ISO DR to be an issue but I've always had other cameras to shoot scenes with high lighting contrast when image quality has been a higher priority than catching the shot.

With regards to AF, the D5 can achieve a higher percentage of focus keepers when photographing approaching subjects with fast primes such as 105/1.4 and 200/2 compared to D850. However, with the 70-200/2.8 FL, I've felt both cameras are excellent. I used the D5 when I really needed to catch the shot with no margin for error. The D6 makes catching the shot especially with human subjects really easy.

The D5 viewfinder is easier to use for action subjects as it is easier to see the frame edges and corners while shooting from slightly awkward angles than the D850 which is a bit tight for me and requires really optimal positioning of the eye behind the ocular to see into corners. During long shoots I find the D5 more comfortable. The D6 viewfinder also has this extra eye relief.

I nowadays use the D850 for landscape, close-ups and similar subjects that don't move and shoot the moving subjects in most cases with the D6, which has a delightful AF system and a lower-pitched sound so enjoy it more. And so many user-friendly features that make shooting easier and more refined (such as a glove mode for touch screen, custom group area with face priority and a high degree of customizability, and connectivity).

For large prints, the D850 delivers impeccably detailed images. As mentioned before, at medium-high to really high ISO, I prefer the outcome from the D5/6.

I have several build quality issues with the D850. My D850's multi-selector is not as tactile-responsive as those of the integrated vertical grip models and sometimes with gloves on, I struggle with it. The vertical grip-body joint is not as rigid as I'd like; this can be an issue for tripod-based macro work. The D5/6 don't have any such problems. Mounting the 90 degree viewfinder attachment to D5/6 is a breeze as one just slides it in (assuming you have an extra eyepiece attachment).

Thank you  :).

reassuring reading, Ilkka!

Most often I’m using iso range 800- 12800 (BIF and football). Portraits is either done in existing light (avoid strong/contrasting light, or take advantage of shadow area) or with portable strobes.

The little experience so far tell me that D5 nail focus better when photographing in low light (less hunting). I often use the 35 and 85 at 1.4.

Never thought of the difference regarding the viewfinder before you mentioned it, but yes!

Yes, D850 can give really detailed prints when needed, but hopefully so can D5 (biggest I print is A2 - and I dont do landscapes).

Never had any issue with D850 and build quality, though it felt more like a «toy» compared to the D5.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 19, 2021, 22:49:08
Thx ☺️.

When I bought the D850, it was initially meant to become a non-sport camera body. In the end, it proved to be a very capable sport camera, with the advantage to have a large pixel count, excellent for large view pictures. Though, it is not entirely a competitor in terms of AF or high ISO. Last year situation was that I was carrying three bodies: a D5 and a D850 as frontliners, and a third D5 body as backup.

With regard to ETTR matters, I have never been a big fan (maybe wrongfully) of this method and prefer to rely on the exposure data from the camera eventually corrected by ⅓ stop, plus or minus. Further I believe the D5 is largely ISO invariant.

To summarize: the eventual corrections / fine tuning of my photography is largely dictated by the (demanding) working environment; so that further fine tuning / considerations with regard to ETTR or ISO invariancy is not so relevant for me.

Your last question: you should select under a3 the two parameters which fit the best for the type of activity you are picturing. For my main activity, AF reaction is put on medium, while subject movement is on stable (exact terms might differ, as I’m translating back from my French manual).

Interesting regarding iso invariance. I’ve always used ETTR, but now I’m not sure if it is needed? Usually I ETTR and adjust the exposure in Capture NX-D - in order to capture as much details as possible. Usually I use manual mode (sometimes with auto iso). Thanks, this I have to look more into.

When it comes to AF settings, I have to experiment with the settings, especially BIF (Erratic or not).
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: golunvolo on January 19, 2021, 23:14:49
I have had a D5 for the last 3 months and I still learning about the af modes, uses and shortcomings. Low iso dynamic range has been no problem and the light in my corner of the world is quite harsh...on the other hand, I intend to use it mostly for low light situations and fast -dancers- action The strong points are well known and all true. A joy to use.

  Shiny skin, strong light and deep shadows. You can get more range but I like to reproduce the contrast I'm seeing with my eyes.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 20, 2021, 01:55:38
I have had a D5 for the last 3 months and I still learning about the af modes, uses and shortcomings. Low iso dynamic range has been no problem and the light in my corner of the world is quite harsh...on the other hand, I intend to use it mostly for low light situations and fast -dancers- action The strong points are well known and all true. A joy to use.

  Shiny skin, strong light and deep shadows. You can get more range but I like to reproduce the contrast I'm seeing with my eyes.

Thank you  :)!

It’s clear that in the right hands the low iso dynamic range is not an issue; both you and MFloyd prove that, nice picture!

Low light and fast dancers; in this part of the year I’m also often working in low light, but my «dancers» are golden eagles (or my kids  ;D )  :). I would be interested in what settings you experience works best.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: David H. Hartman on January 21, 2021, 04:07:24
It’s clear that in the right hands the low iso dynamic range is not an issue; both you and MFloyd prove that, nice picture!

Low Dynamic Range is ralative...

Dynamic Range v. ISO: Nikon D1, D300s, D5, D850 (https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D1,Nikon%20D300S,Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D850)

The Nikon D5 looks good especially from ISO 640 and higher and it looks fine to me at ISO 400. The D850 looks good from ISO 64 to 6400.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on January 21, 2021, 13:05:44
Low Dynamic Range is ralative...

Dynamic Range v. ISO: Nikon D1, D300s, D5, D850 (https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D1,Nikon%20D300S,Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D850)

The Nikon D5 looks good especially from ISO 640 and higher and it looks fine to me at ISO 400. The D850 looks good from ISO 64 to 6400.

Also dynamic range is just one parameter, a full characterisation of the SNR vs. luminosity reveals more about the differences between sensors than just looking at DR.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 21, 2021, 15:24:18
Low Dynamic Range is ralative...

Dynamic Range v. ISO: Nikon D1, D300s, D5, D850 (https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D1,Nikon%20D300S,Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D850)

The Nikon D5 looks good especially from ISO 640 and higher and it looks fine to me at ISO 400. The D850 looks good from ISO 64 to 6400.

Thank you, David  :).

Yes, most likely nothing to worry about. It’s easy to be misled by all the opinions on the internet  :).

Nevertheless it’s always interesting to read about experiences here at Nikongear.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 21, 2021, 15:28:29
Also dynamic range is just one parameter, a full characterisation of the SNR vs. luminosity reveals more about the differences between sensors than just looking at DR.

Yes, that’s why I’m so eager to hear about your experiences in «real life»  :D - long term.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Jack Dahlgren on January 21, 2021, 19:00:28
Also dynamic range is just one parameter, a full characterisation of the SNR vs. luminosity reveals more about the differences between sensors than just looking at DR.

Indeed, I find the previously referenced chart to be thin justification for choosing one camera over another.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: David H. Hartman on January 21, 2021, 23:33:10
Indeed, I find the previously referenced chart to be thin justification for choosing one camera over another.

I've read criticism of the linked site and it's findings. I believe the chart linked is good enough for a practical evaluation of various cameras. I believe dynamic range is only one criteria to consider.

From practical experience that I found the Nikon D2H deficient in dynamic range under many situations. In particular I found it near impossible to record shadow detail in a groom's black tuxedo while holding diffused highlights in the bride's white gown. I was shooting a cousin's wedding by request in a photojournalist style in deference to the official photographers. I was shooting with on camera flash as mandated by light in the church and reception hall. A better photographer probably would have dealt more constructively with the challenge.

I would have preferred to have shot the wedding with a Nikon F5 using Tri-X. The family wanted color and I could not find but 2 rolls of color negative film with in miles.

Dave

I'm not a Nikon D5 owner. I made the post above to stimulate discussion believing D5's dynamic range is not deficient but rather consistent with the primary use photographers put the D5 to.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Jack Dahlgren on January 22, 2021, 00:05:01
I've read criticism of the linked site and it's findings. I believe the chart linked is good enough for a practical evaluation of various cameras. I believe dynamic range is only one criteria to consider.

From practical experience that I found the Nikon D2H deficient in dynamic range under many situations. In particular I found it near impossible to record shadow detail in a groom's black tuxedo while holding diffused highlights in the bride's white gown. I was shooting a cousin's wedding by request in a photojournalist style in deference to the official photographers. I was shooting with on camera flash as mandated by light in the church and reception hall. A better photographer probably would have dealt more constructively with the challenge.

I would have preferred to have shot the wedding with a Nikon F5 using Tri-X. The family wanted color and I could not find but 2 rolls of color negative film with in miles.

Dave

I'm not a Nikon D5 owner. I made the post above to stimulate discussion believing D5's dynamic range is not deficient but rather consistent with the primary use photographers put the D5 to.

I think that since the D2H is nearly 18 years old, that most people (who could afford a D5) could decide between D2H and D5 without using that site.

As for your experience in that wedding, a minor suggestion... if the groom would have considered perhaps a baby blue tux the contrast would not have been so grave.  :)
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: David H. Hartman on January 22, 2021, 02:30:10
The D1 in the chart and the D2H which was marginally more capable in dynamic range compared to the D1 shows us where we came from. Yes these cameras are about two decades old.  :o

My point is the D5 isn't deficient even though it doesn't have quite the dynamic range of the D850 at low ISO(s) and the D850 isn't deficient even though it doesn't have quite the dynamic range of the D5 at higher ISO(s). The D5 and D850 overlap some in their capabilities but each is well suited for their intended purpose.

Dave

I didn't look up the release dates of the D1 and D2H.

If someone has a D5 that they are dissatisfied with please send it to me!   :)
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Hugh_3170 on January 22, 2021, 02:50:33
Those that like older Dx series sensors, but can't afford such a body, the D700 (tweaked D3 sensor) and the Df (tweaked D4 sensor) are now quite affordable on the second hand market.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Jack Dahlgren on January 22, 2021, 06:14:20
Those that like older Dx series sensors, but can't afford such a body, the D700 (tweaked D3 sensor) and the Df (tweaked D4 sensor) are now quite affordable on the second hand market.

Yes, Df is quite capable in low light.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Hugh_3170 on January 22, 2021, 07:50:20
If I recall correctly, the D700 had the same AF and exposure systems as the D3, so for its day it was a really great value proposition.

The Df has borrowed heavily from the D600/610, albeit without the oily shutter issues - thank god!

Yes, Df is quite capable in low light.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on January 24, 2021, 11:23:28
If I recall correctly, the D700 had the same AF and exposure systems as the D3, so for its day it was a really great value proposition.

Yes and no; when using screwdriver AF lenses, I noticed the D3 focused them much faster than the D700. Marianne Oelund at dpr forums also reported having measured the focusing speeds (I believe with AF-S lenses) and the D3 was also measurably faster than the D700 in her tests.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Hugh_3170 on January 24, 2021, 12:40:37
Well they both certainly shared the same Multi-CAM 3500FX autofocus sensor module featuring 51 AF points. 

However I do accept that the parameters that were in play for the D3 AF versus those for the D700 may have resulted in faster AF performance for the D3.  Without having checked out the trials you refer to, I do know that the perfomance of the D700 in other areas very much depended on whether or not the handgrip with the additional battery power was fitted.

Yes and no; when using screwdriver AF lenses, I noticed the D3 focused them much faster than the D700. Marianne Oelund at dpr forums also reported having measured the focusing speeds (I believe with AF-S lenses) and the D3 was also measurably faster than the D700 in her tests.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: chambeshi on January 24, 2021, 14:32:41
Thanks for this suggestion

Does PhotonstoPhotos have a page for SNR vs. luminosity? Is not luminosity another term for Dynamic Range? I looked at the DXOMark site but any analyses are too well hidden to excavate. I also recall this thread here in 2017, just as the D850 had been measured: in which Bill Claff's underscored his explicit methodology he uses to measure sensors

https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=6649.msg107054#msg107054

Also dynamic range is just one parameter, a full characterisation of the SNR vs. luminosity reveals more about the differences between sensors than just looking at DR.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Frode on January 24, 2021, 15:10:12
Yes and no; when using screwdriver AF lenses, I noticed the D3 focused them much faster than the D700. Marianne Oelund at dpr forums also reported having measured the focusing speeds (I believe with AF-S lenses) and the D3 was also measurably faster than the D700 in her tests.

That was my experience also.

Same regarding D5 vsD850 as well.
Title: Re: D5 - long term experience?
Post by: Ilkka Nissilä on January 24, 2021, 16:56:35
Thanks for this suggestion

Does PhotonstoPhotos have a page for SNR vs. luminosity? Is not luminosity another term for Dynamic Range? I looked at the DXOMark site but any analyses are too well hidden to excavate. I also recall this thread here in 2017, just as the D850 had been measured: in which Bill Claff's underscored his explicit methodology he uses to measure sensors

https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=6649.msg107054#msg107054

Luminosity refers to the luminous power of the light source. That wasn't quite a good choice of word from me, as what I meant is really the pixel brightness in the image or the number of detected photons for each photosite. I'll try to give a more precise explanation. SNR of the signal from each photosite is dependent on how many photons are detected (leading to photon shot noise n_ph = sqrt(eta*N), where eta is the quantum efficiency and N is the number of photons), the thermal and other sources of noise. As the photon shot noise depends on the quantum efficiency and the other noise sources depend on the quality of the analog-to-digital conversion and electronics, different sensors have different SNR vs. number of detected photons. This can be measured for R, G, and B photosites.

DXOMark do publish "Full SNR" graphs; for some reason I'm not able to see them in the mobile version, only when viewing their site in a desktop browser. However, without the numerical data these are not easy to utilize. The comparison between the full SNR across camera models is not directly featured. I'm not sure if it is possible to extract the full SNR data from the site in numerical form. They use "gray value" in the X axis of the full SNR graphs, I'm not sure how they calculate the gray value from R, G, and B.

The protocol they use and the parameters are explained here:

https://www.dxomark.com/dxomark-camera-sensor-testing-protocol-and-scores/
https://www.dxomark.com/glossary/color-depth/

What they do present in an easy-to-compare way are the following:
- SNR for 18% gray (this represents the signal-to-noise ratio of midtones)
- Engineering dynamic range (which is the (log) difference between maximum luminosity that doesn't introduce clipping and the luminosity at which the SNR equals 1)
- Tonal range (essentially the log number of distinct gray tones that can be distinguished from noise)
- Color sensitivity (log number of distinct color values that can be distinguished from noise)

Basically, SNR for 18% tells us how good the SNR is for midtones, dynamic range tells us how wide a range of tones (in terms of image luminance value, I wasn't quite able to see how dxomark calculate this from R, G, and B SNR graphs, is there visually perceived sensitivity weighting of the colors?) can be separated from noise, and it reflects mainly the quality of the deepest shadows or how deep those are. Tonal range tells us how many different gray values can be distinguished from noise and this is dependent on the whole SNR curve. Color sensitivity tells us how many different colors can be separated from noise, again it is dependent on the whole SNR data.

A lot of online discussion revolves around dynamic range but I believe all of these parameters are important to characterise sensor image quality. Dynamic range is imporatant if one photographs a very contrasty scene, such as one where the sun is in the photograph and foreground objects are in shadow or if one underexposes the main subject heavily and requires brightening of the subject in post-processing. In such cases the sensor dynamic range can be, and is, important. However, in a normally-exposed image which doesn't need shadow-lifting, the other image quality parameters can tell us more about the differences in image quality. I guess photographing contrasty scenes is very common and is perceived as a limitation of photography vs. how the human eye and brain see scenes (processing a lot!), and thus the dynamic range gets talked about a lot.