Nikon D5 - first impressions

[Lorne]

Here are my test shots plus calibration:

All taken at 1/160th of a second f=8 All with same lens on same tripod in same light, Lens is Ai-S 200mm Micro Nikkor f=4, all ISO 100 ... ups I just see that I accidentialy must have hit the ISO dial on the D500. Sorry

Frank,
Your D500 shot had Auto-ISO set, the other shots were set to ISO100 and had -1.3 EV compensation. All the shots are underexposed when I checked them with FastRawViewer. Was that intentional?

[Frank Fremerey]

It was not my intention to underexpose. It was my intention to have all exposures the same.
The Auto ISO was an operating error. I accidentially switched it on after having in tentionally
switched it off.

Question: Does the exposure compensation influence the measurement? I think not.

I think exposure compensation only influences exposure in Automatic modes, not in M with fixed ISO

Of course I am ready to learn. I can only profit.

Note to myself: do not conduct such neasurements when in time pressure. Take the time they need.

[Frank Fremerey]

So after my test I am still longing for the D850/D900 that is not yet announced. High ISO combined with High Resolution plus fifth generation AF and White Balance that both make for a huge difference.
 
Noise Reduction Technology and the Standard picture style are to be handled with great care. Also the logic behind the exposure control and measurement sytem are to be examined closer. That ist true for both cameras D5 and D500. In the boy series I had two pictures with the boy as a black silhouette and two with blown background. I was aspiring to have all with blown background and still try to understand the reaction of the camera towards what I did.
 
I guess it has to do with Nikon knitting the exposure and the AF even system closer together and also with a recent change in my working style. I use AF-on recently. Before I used the AF/AL measure and store then recompose method which lead to next to no exposure fails.

[ArendV]

Frank, I have the same experience with the D500. Every now and then the exposure is completely off with completely blown out highlights in very contrasty scenes. I am now using spot metering more than I have ever done before but still get these exposure surprises sometimes, so also still learning how to control this.

[Fons Baerken]

i think changing the aperture for more dof may be helpful, and indeed in the boy shot spotmetering should be prefered, with af-on only one automates too much,.. 2 cents

[Andy]

Frank, I have the same experience with the D500. Every now and then the exposure is completely off with completely blown out highlights in very contrasty scenes. I am now using spot metering more than I have ever done before but still get these exposure surprises sometimes, so also still learning how to control this.

Arend,
what is your a4 and b5 setting?
Do you have any of the face recognition features in AF turned on?

The face recognition adds a ton of uncertainity
rgds, Andy

[ArendV]

Andy, I have switched all the face recognition features to off (So A4 3D-Tracking Face Detection is off and B5 Matrix Metering Face Detection is off). Also did this as they are supposed to be more power consuming.

[Frank Fremerey]

what is your a4 and b5 setting?
Do you have any of the face recognition features in AF turned on?
The face recognition adds a ton of uncertainity
rgds, Andy

Thank you, Andy!

[MFloyd]

Frank, I have the same experience with the D500. Every now and then the exposure is completely off with completely blown out highlights in very contrasty scenes. I am now using spot metering more than I have ever done before but still get these exposure surprises sometimes, so also still learning how to control this.

I have the same experience: where I only used spot exposure in very specific cases; now I have to select spot metering more and more often (e.g. in very contrasty scenes); otherwise I have underexposed subjects.

a4 is on for 3D Tracking; b5 is off.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Is any issue with a sticking, or slowly closing, aperture mechanism out of the question?

Very erratic exposures in the direction of total overexposure tend to correlate with aperture issues, not metering as such. Look at the EXIF record to see if settings for the blown frames appear normal. If that is the case, the culprit probably is the manner the lens stops down.

[Frank Fremerey]

I summarize the experience from 3 users on 2 camera models from the fifth generation here that there seems to be "some change" in the way very high contrast scenes are handled by auto exposure modes.

There is some learning curve here. I do not say yet that there might be something wrong with the metering and auto exposure system. It is just different than in all the Digital Nikons I have used before.

I have experienced these problems in Matrix, Medium weighted and Spot.

All of my lenses are quite new (less that 3 years old) and regularly checked by NPS. I do not believe in the "sticky aperture" theory, but I will check setting of "offshots" in detail.

Frank

Low contrast scenes are recorded flawlessly with a tendency in Matrix metering on the D5 to make the scene appear "brighter as the eye sees". You might want to correct for the "appearence with the bare eye".

[Bjørn Rørslett]

On the NG Scotland event, Erik and I discovered several cameras that apparently malfunctioned and the problem was the aperture stop-down lever had come out of alignment. Any leak of lubrication onto the iris also will potentially cause issues, in particular at rapid shooting rates.

I have used my D500 for a while now and find the exposures being very consistent, although at the default factory setting they are a tad 'rich' for my taste and scenery, thus I have adjusted the zero point for all modes by -1/3 EV.

[Frank Fremerey]

Yes, Bjørn, before I draft a verdict I need reproducible proof which I do not have yet. I have in fact some proof of user error like stepping in bright sunlight with 200 & f=2.2 and the poor Auto ISO is not able to tune down ISO below 100.

Another time I set exposure compensation to +1,7 in blasting backlight and might have hit some bright spot or some dark spot as metering spot. So I have correctly exposed, overexposed and underexposed shots all in the same series.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Has anyone tested the radio-based advanced wireless lighting yet? I'm trying to get my WR-R10 firmware upgraded to 3.0 so I could use it (it is in service right now), and then I have to find an SB-5000.

I've only read two blog posts from users who have used it and it seemed to work well for their uses but the reports were not very detailed. I've also read two user posts on forums which were less happy with it - one reported that they couldn't get the WR-R10 to trigger multiple radio flashes but this could be a user error. Nikon says "When paired with the WR-R10 and the D5 or the D500, this Speedlight can control up to six groups (A-F) or 18 Speedlights for truly advanced wireless lighting. " I am not sure what controls what here, shouldn't the camera with the WR-R10 control all the remote flashes? Why would the SB-5000 control the other flashes?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Frank: Agree that user errors are always the default likely explanation, in particular when one is dealing with a new camera model.

However, that does not rule out other causes for the observed discrepancies and errors. I have seen and been troubled too many times by sticking apertures of defunct aperture coupling to believe otherwise.