Nikon D500 - first impressions

[Andrea B.]

Why would I have frontfocus or backfocus issues with the D500? I haven't seen that so far. Not sure what you mean?

[bjornthun]

I'm not saying that your particular D500 will have it, but it's a known problem for DSLRs. The D500 even offers a special calibration tool to correct it.

[tommiejeep]

There is one caveat in the comparison to the mirrorless Sony A6300: The Nikon D500 will have the better AF tracking, but the Sony A6300 won't have front- or back focus issues, so choose your tool wisely.

Bjorn, since I would only be buying the D500 for fast sports, birds and events the a6300 would be taking a real chance (and expensive with lenses).  No matter how many times I work on using the EM1 and a7II, the EVF just doesn't work unless I want to shoot at longer range for the FL.  Then it is still not up to the OVF of my Nikons.   Sure, I get the odd reasonable image but I cannot depend on getting the one I really want.  I need to pick up the target immediately and know that the AF is going to lock immediately.  Maybe it is just me but I have yet to see images that make me thing so .

I really do like EVFs for some things but not for fast, erratic action.  I'll take my chances with having to fine tune.
Tom

[bjornthun]

Bjorn, since I would only be buying the D500 for fast sports, birds and events the a6300 would be taking a real chance (and expensive with lenses).  No matter how many times I work on using the EM1 and a7II, the EVF just doesn't work unless I want to shoot at longer range for the FL.  Then it is still not up to the OVF of my Nikons.   Sure, I get the odd reasonable image but I cannot depend on getting the one I really want.  I need to pick up the target immediately and know that the AF is going to lock immediately.  Maybe it is just me but I have yet to see images that make me thing so .

I really do like EVFs for some things but not for fast, erratic action.  I'll take my chances with having to fine tune.
Tom

Which is what I wrote in my post preceding Andrea's answer to me.

AF tracking and speed => Nikon D500
Precise AF without AF calibration => Sony A6300
Choose the tool accordingly.

The AF tracking capability is not really a viewfinder issue, but a sensor issue in the case of mirrorless. Likewise it's not the OVF that gives the D500 its' tracking capability, but the AF sensor.

[John Koerner]

There is one caveat in the comparison to the mirrorless Sony A6300: The Nikon D500 will have the better AF tracking, but the Sony A6300 won't have front- or back focus issues, so choose your tool wisely.

That is a caveat in your head only.

Every real-world comparison of the D500 and the A6300 shows the A6300 is left way behind, way behind, when it comes to AF ability.

They are very similar in image quality, with the slight advantage to the Nikon, but in AF excellence the D500 blows the Sony out of the water.

[John Koerner]

Nice rating, but as mentioned in the D810 - Warning thread; You might want to take care when handling due to the plastic mirror-box and less than adequate mount screws.

This is nonsense.

From what I have read, any "plastic" components on the D500 are thermoplastic, stronger than steel, but much lighter, making it better to have than magnesium.

I have been shooting my D810 for awhile now, with a heavy 300 f/2.8 VR II on it, with ZERO issues.

I do not make it a habit to drop my expensive equipment all over the place, so I can't tell you how resilient the setup is, because I am not a fumbler by nature.

But I do hike the deserts, mountains, and canyons of CA, with the lens and camera over my shoulder, locked onto my tripod, and everything is okay 

When B&H finally sends me my ordered D500, I will be doing the same thing with it 

Jack

[tommiejeep]

Bjorn, I am not talking about tracking.  I'm talking about being able to pick up a play, in case of soccer, when the ball goes to a completely different player  in a different direction.  I rarely shoot bursts these days and normally not more than a 3 or 4 shot burst .  Two or more guys going for a header and trying to catch the exact moment of impact gets a burst  .  Shots on goal is another.    EVFs are just not there at this point.  It is another thing when you know exactly where the action is taking place, any Gym meet or even some track and field events for instance. You can get your dof and speed right and probably catch most of the action.

One of a three shot burst with the D3S,70-200vrII at dusk.   I had to follow the ball cleared down field and the pickup the two players as the ball came down.  All in a few seconds.

Tom

[bjornthun]

Bjorn, I am not talking about tracking.  I'm talking about being able to pick up a play, in case of soccer, when the ball goes to a completely different player  in a different direction.  I rarely shoot bursts these days and normally not more than a 3 or 4 shot burst .  Two or more guys going for a header and trying to catch the exact moment of impact gets a burst  .  Shots on goal is another.    EVFs are just not there at this point.  It is another thing when you know exactly where the action is taking place, any Gym meet or even some track and field events for instance. You can get your dof and speed right and probably catch most of the action.

One of a three shot burst with the D3S,70-200vrII at dusk.   I had to follow the ball cleared down field and the pickup the two players as the ball came down.  All in a few seconds.

Tom

The issue is the readout rate from the sensor, rather than the EVF. The EVF can do 120 fps, but it can't get image data fast enough, and the EVF is the last member in the chain.

[bjornthun]

That is a caveat in your head only.

Every real-world comparison of the D500 and the A6300 shows the A6300 is left way behind, way behind, when it comes to AF ability.

They are very similar in image quality, with the slight advantage to the Nikon, but in AF excellence the D500 blows the Sony out of the water.

Follow this link: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a6300/sony-a6300A.HTM
Scroll down and you will see an image of the all metal frame parts that are used for the camera body as well as lens mount and support. This is something different than the plastic mirrorbox in the D500. The D500 is almost twice the price of the A6300, yet it has unfortunately only gotten a thermoplastic a.k.a. polycarbonate a.k.a. plastic mirrorbox. Nikon DSLRs have gone from all metal to plastic mirrorbox, except the D5. Sony has gone the other direction with the A6300 and the second generation A7 bodies, and moved to all metal bodies. I wonder what's going on. 

The A7 mkII with its all metall body feels much nicer to handle and much more rugged than the original A7, that had plastic parts. I feel very comfortable, knowing that my Sony A7 mkII can take a beating, with a metall frame and an AF that stays precise without need for calibration. It may not AF track like a D500, but it's got a rugged body. 

To the moderators, sorry for straying a bit off topic.

[Jakov Minić]

bjornthun, what's a rugged camera body if it makes no photos?

it's nice that you have apologised to the moderators, but you might also consider apologising to the entire community?
then, if you would like to continue to talk about other cameras than the D500, please open up a separate thread concerning those cameras and stop polluting this thread.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

BT: open a new thread in which Sonys are the main target of attention. That will give less cross-talk and thread pollution.

The admins will happily assist in moving relevant post(s) into such a thread.

[bjornthun]

Sorry to everyone, for going a bit off topic. 

BR and Jakov, I've had my say about rugged, metal (mirrorless!) cameras, no need for any new thread. 

[Erik Lund]

This is nonsense.

From what I have read, any "plastic" components on the D500 are thermoplastic, stronger than steel, but much lighter, making it better to have than magnesium.

I have been shooting my D810 for awhile now, with a heavy 300 f/2.8 VR II on it, with ZERO issues.

I do not make it a habit to drop my expensive equipment all over the place, so I can't tell you how resilient the setup is, because I am not a fumbler by nature.

But I do hike the deserts, mountains, and canyons of CA, with the lens and camera over my shoulder, locked onto my tripod, and everything is okay 

When B&H finally sends me my ordered D500, I will be doing the same thing with it 

Jack

From what you have read,,,, Hmmm sounds like your and armchair photographer

Thermoplastic or not, the ' resistance' to real wold use will only show itself after a period of time/use such like the real cases reported here and in other forums.

Sure most of these are results of 'drops' but that is a pretty good indication of the long term durability of the parts.

Seems to me you need to look further into what goes into engineering, especially with regards to materials and their properties.

To get another thing clear, I'm not in the habit of dropping my gear,,,

[Bjørn Rørslett]

No sane photographer has a habit of "dropping gear". That would be disruptive to the work flow. However, in real life, accidents can occur, even when one tries to avoid them. Any working photographer is familiar with such basic facts.

It is high time to get this and other threads back on track.

[ArendV]

Nikon already released a Firmware-update for the D500
http://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/184.html

Official reason:
Fixed an issue that sometimes resulted in the options for SETUP MENU > Language not displaying correctly.

I would not be surprised if this also fixes other minor issues without notification.