Nikon D500 - first impressions

[Frank Fremerey]

I understand, but magnification is a linear measure, so the additional magnification needed to bring the DX image to the same output size as the FX image is 1.5 times higher.

I see.

The FX Sensor hat 2.35 times the area for collecting photons. Gathering twice as many photons (if collection per area is the same) means FX is always one stop in advance, right?

[simsurace]

QE (Quantum Efficiency) is measured after all filtration. It simply measures how well the photosite (after filtration) converts the photons that reach it  into an imaging signal.

The CFA (colour filter array - usually Bayer RGBG) by definition must filter out a lot of light, at least one stop and probably closer to two. For example the red filter removes most green and all blue, so that's less light reaching the photosite.
Black and white sensors don't have the CFA so are usually a stop more sensitive.

Thanks. However, it is difficult to reconcile this with the description of how sensorgen QE figures are calculated. That description is a bit on the short side however.

[simsurace]

I see.

The FX Sensor hat 2.35 times the area for collecting photons. Gathering twice as many photons (if collection per area is the same) means FX is always one stop in advance, right?

This is a contentious statement .
It always depends on the context, i.e. what you wish to equalize between the two captures.

[Andrea B.]

I always thought aperture and shutter speed controlled "gathered" light, not sensor size.

[simsurace]

They do, don't worry.
It would maybe be wise to discuss these issues in a separate thread if anyone wishes to discuss them at all. Otherwise the connection to the D500 may be lost.

[Frank Fremerey]

Simone: I am still waiting for my D500 .... conection not even made yet ;-)

[simsurace]

Simone: I am still waiting for my D500 .... conection not even made yet ;-)

Anticipation is better than instant gratification

[Frank Fremerey]

Seems I will not receive my D500 before Scotland. NPS called, my dealer spoke to Nikon. Have to check Calumet in Edinburgh, if they can sell me one...

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I won't get my D500 either, as I'm leaving Norway on the 1st. Will get later in the month.

Obviously Nikon gave priority to the US market this time.

[chris dees]

Just picked up mine today.
I wanted to wait for a pick up in the summer but my dealer had one on the shelf and send me an email if I'm interested.
When I wanted to pick it up this morning it seemed they made a mistake and it was a pre-ordered one. Luckily the owner (I know him for years) was in and he gave it to me.
Bad thing is somebody has to wait (a little?) longer for his/her D500. They have a huge back-log.
So yes, I have the D500 with me in Scotland.

A quick garden shot with the 300PF. No AF fine-tuning yet, I'm still configuring.

[Jakov Minić]

Chris, you lucky guy
Enjoy the new gadget!

[Akira]

Congrats, Chris.  You look as happy as a box of birds!

[Andy]

A few early impressions. Still haven't had time to shoot more, but a bit was possible.

1) The viewfinder
Looks like to be one of the highlights of the camera. If compared with the D7200 and D800, the impression is that it is about the same size as the D800 viewfinder. In addition, that the clarity and contrast of the D500 VF seems to be better than the one in the D800. I like it, as the viewfinder is one of the critical components of a camera for me - as I need it most of the time.

2) The handlebar
I like the deep recessed form of the handle - similar to the D750 (and better than the one on the D800). The probability that the camera slips out from my fingers when carrying only with finger tips seems to be very low.

3) AF coverage is really large

4) Weight
I mentioned it before, but this impression comes back and back. The camera is light. Add to it the smaller DX Telelens options and the advantage grows vs. FX bodies

5) Speed
In most aspects, the D500 is as fast as the D4, sometimes faster (AF, XQD, ..). I am using the second 2933x 128GB XQD card in this camera and the D500 behaves like the D5. Whatever I shot, the writing was done when I released the shutter. Which means: I don't need to spend ANY attention to the buffer capacity. This wasn't the case with the D800, D750 and D7200 (for my style of shooting). Not that I always need this buffe capacity, but when needed - it simplifies things.

6) ISO Sensitivity
I might get old, but I don't see it particularily insightful when there are long discussions about high ISO performance of contempoarary sensors. Most sensors are so close to each other that the subtleties don't matter in most cases any more. Ranges up to ISO 3200 on DX are well usable in most circumstances and if needed all cameras can be used like in the "good old" days when there wasn't an ISO dial on the camera body.

7) Flicker reduction
Hey, I like it. If I am not wrong, the first Nikon DSLR with this feature. Not the most important one, but one more feature to avoid pressing the butter at the wrong time when lights were flickering with 50 or 60 Hz.

8.) EFCS
Like the D5, the D500 has the slightly improved EFCS (Electronic front curtain shutter) of the D810. One more thing to reduce shake and vibrations on the tripod (just use it with 3s shutter delay).

9) Size
The combo D500 & AFS 300mm/4 PF is a size/performance winner. The camera and lens look so small, yet the performance is good - very good actually. Just give it a try.

rgds,
Andy

[Andy]

Long distance shots with the D500 and the AFS 300mm/4 PF. All handheld (I was in a rush).
The camera reports 450mm in the EXIF data.
Total weight of the combo: 1615 gr (D5, body only: 1405 gr)

1) The scene. 16mm DX (24mm)
2) Full frame with the AFS 300mm PF. Distance approx 500 meter, 1500 ft
3) 100% crop of original image
4) Full frame with AFS 300mm/4 PF. Distance approx 1km, 3000ft
5) 100% crop of original image

RAWs are <here>. Just use the filenumber as index

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I see.

The FX Sensor hat 2.35 times the area for collecting photons. Gathering twice as many photons (if collection per area is the same) means FX is always one stop in advance, right?

No it does not. You have a 2.35X bigger area to take into account as well.

This error in various disguises crops up over and over again on the 'net and people now start to believe this is a fact, not a myth. Photographers understood this basic fact in the old days when we used hand-held meters and formats ranging from the smallest to the biggest sheet film, so it is not that hard to learn.

Give this a second thought: why does light metering work at all? It is because the exposure is independent of format. That is also why we use relative not absolute apertures. f/2.8 lets through the same light intensity no matter what the focal length is.