Nikon D500 - first impressions

[bjornthun]

This doesn't explain at least to me why I get the difference, as the focus point always is on the skier, even the skier looks underexposed

But you still used the matrix mode, right? Then it will still take the rest of the motif into consideration, and the rest is very different from the skier. Spot metering would be on the skier and nothing else.

[Bent Hjarbo]

But you still used the matrix mode, right? Then it will still take the rest of the motif into consideration, and the rest is very different from the skier. Spot metering would be on the skier and nothing else.

Yes I used the matrix metering may have to change my settings  during this type of photography, a pity as the D700 did very well, now I am on a level like an old Canon (I have seen this behavior before when I got help from a Canon user some years ago)

[bjornthun]

Yes I used the matrix metering may have to change my settings  during this type of photography, a pity as the D700 did very well, now I am on a level like an old Canon (I have seen this behavior before when I got help from a Canon user some years ago)

We're much luckier now than when I had Olympus OM, since we can look at the histogram and review images in challenging light conditions.   

[Bent Hjarbo]

We're much luckier now than when I had Olympus OM, since we can look at the histogram and review images in challenging light conditions.   

You are right, but during sport, you may not get another chance, so the correct exposure first time is important.
I may have to alter my way of working to take the change into account, spot or center weighted.

[Akira]

Yes I used the matrix metering may have to change my settings  during this type of photography, a pity as the D700 did very well, now I am on a level like an old Canon (I have seen this behavior before when I got help from a Canon user some years ago)

Apparently Canon doesn't move the metering point along with the focus point at least in the spot metering mode even on the latest 5D MkVI.  Dpreview complains about that:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/15

[MILLIREHM]

Apparently Canon doesn't move the metering point along with the focus point at least in the spot metering mode even on the latest 5D MkVI.  Dpreview complains about that:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/15

Wasnt aware of that, thats truly a significant miss.
That feature makes spotmetering action capable

[chambeshi]

Dear All, Thank you all for your commiserations :-) Indeed, one lives and learns!

For the record, diagnosis by Nikon of my dropped D500 did not return a death certificate....  "the TFT monitor, front cover, focus screen, mount, prism box unit and eye piece block unit needs to be replaced....."  It could have been far worse, given the factors of the impact. And i'm still waiting for the parts to ship in from Japan, estimate ~US$600 !

Hi Chambesi
.                  I feel your bad luck, not your stupid mistake.

And on the subject of tripod-lens/camera anti-slide safety, yes, the expensive lesson is been BIG positive in the "Red Button" on the MP-20 of the Surui system. But with a heavy lens that cost so much, I now always use the snap-link with 'Safety-Noose' attached to the tripod collar\neck [photos above 11 Jan 2017]. Still the tripod can fall or be knocked over (!)

kind regards

woody

........
Why the mounting base plate cant have the middle third as a clamp and the front and rear thirds of the clamp, be a
Permanent part of the base plate, where you would need to slide the lens foot into it, with a spring loaded pin to restrict the sliding operation of the foot. Keeping it secure if you over look any of the set up method.
This is a system that would safeguard  many a  equipment from serious damage, when a  simple user error occurs.
I had a in depth conversation over the Xmas period, on this subject, as I am selecting a lens mounting system, and
Equipment security as well as performance are on my mind.

[John G]

The type of lens foot clamping device I am referring to is a Manfrotto 357, the same as the one used on the 393 Gimbal.  I believe there is a method of making it arca swiss compatible. It may raise the rig by no more than 10mm.
There is another foot clamp used on the Nest NT-530H US/Mk II. I do not know the part number.
The above are not endorsements of these products, but are to allow any one with a interest to view their lens foot mounting and clamping method.
With a little study, it will be seen that a lens foot is to be "front or rear entered" into the mounting plate. When the foot is in the mounting plate it is secured
by the dovetail sides, there is a retracting pin that limits the sliding operation of the lens foot, keeping the lens foot retained in the mounting plate.
When the correct balance is achieved, the section of dovetail side wall with the knob can be tightened to hold the foot in the selected position.
FWIW, I feel this is a upgrade to a standard arca swiss type clamping system, if rig security is a priority.   

[chambeshi]

I just bought at Foyles here in London this very useful guide to the D500 published last year. A meaty volume that solves a few mysteries in the inner workings and Menu settings etc:

DAVID BUSCHS NIKON D500 GUIDE TO DIGITAL SLR PHOTOGRAPHY

https://www.rockynook.com/shop/photography/david-buschs-nikon-d500-guide-to-digital-photography/

[Valerie S.]

Apparently Canon doesn't move the metering point along with the focus point at least in the spot metering mode even on the latest 5D MkVI.  Dpreview complains about that:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/15

The metering does use the AF point in the 1D series.

[golunvolo]

I tried the d500 today at bh store in NY. They let me put a card and take the images home. I was considering it as a complement for my d750 because of the speed and extra reach but I´m spoiled my camera´s high ISO performance. In comparison, iso1600 in the d500 looks like iso3200 in the d750 or so is my impression. Anyone else has the same experience? Opinions I have found online so far are not in consensus.   

[Frank Fremerey]

I cannot compare the D750 performance, only the D3 and D600, last one has the same chip set as the D750.

The prefabrication of files, also of the RAW, is generally better in the fifth generation, so there might be an advantage at lower iso values like  1600 and 3200 but with high iso like 10.000 and 20.000 the fifth generation leads due to exspeed5.

Also the AF is much better, the WB in difficult light is much better, body ergonomics is better esp with the grip mb-d17.

Speed of 10fps, buffer size if needed, XQD as robust and very fast media. If you own the D750 I would consider the D500 as a second body, not as a replacement.

Why? The files of the D500 feature a clean and clear look, some might call it "a digital look", while the 24 MP full frame chip in 600, 610, 750 has a very subtle magic I cannot really describe. I also see it in the reaction of people towards the pictures. More positive emotional towards the D600 results.

If you would own the D3 I would clearly say: replace with D500. It runs circles around my old work horse.

[Fons Baerken]

I had to get used to the iq of the d500 very much to the point i almost sold, since i have my lenses for the d500 sorted out, happy camp.
Importantly the raw files almost need no processing.
My comparisons are D3, D800, Df all very different in iq.

[Frank Fremerey]

Fons is right. With good light, most light is good with the exceptional white balance, the RAWs you open in your favourite converter, mine is NX-D, are next to perfect. For event jobs this is a great advantage.

PS to Fons: can you describe the difference between the IQs???

[Akira]

Paco, if you shoot dances using AF, the wider AF area, faster AF and low-ligh AF capability (down to -4EV) of D500 will surely be beneficial and advantageous over D750.  While the pliability of D750 RAW file is unbeatable, there were moments I wanted the wider AF area when I shot the live performance sometime ago.