Mochaman Loc: Wilmington, NC

indeed it is...

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The D500 will mount and use all the functions of Nikkor lenses back to 1977 without an adapter. With non-AI to AI lens conversion (not an adapter) any F mount lens can work.

Canon abandoned everything for the EF mount in 1987. Very clunky adapters are needed to use anything older

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The new D500 is more expensive than the 7D Mark II but it is also two years newer technology. In a head to head contest its probably a better camera partially as a result of that. If you were to get the 7D Mark II I would advise against the Canon 18-200 mm lens, which although fairly competent, does not really excel at anything and has high distortion levels and a design and build that's very old and outdated. In fact if you want the best from either camera you would do well to avoid any of the inexpensive superzoom, wide angle to medium telephoto, lenses from Canon, Nikon, or 3rd parties. They are very popular and extremely convenient, but any zooms lens with a focal range of more than around 4X to 5X (that's four to five times the widest focal length) will compromise image quality to one degree or another. One new lens, the Tamron 18-400 seems to be a relatively good performer, but like all lenses of its type there are still limitations.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Hi Paul,

You sound like an experienced shooter who can likely find nearly any modern camera fairly simple to master. Often with less experienced users I recommend staying away from the most pro-oriented models such as D500 and 7DII, because those cameras have little support for new/inexperienced users. "Lesser" camera models have more built-in shortcuts and automation.

Have you considered the Canon 80D and Nikon D7200 or D7500? While they're "a step down" from the D500 and 7DII, they actually may offer some more of the features you want, while also leaving additional $ to put toward your lens kit. For example, saving $700 by buying a Canon 80D instead of a Nikon D500 would go a long, long way toward a high quality lens. IMO, lenses are a lot more important than the camera they're used upon. The image quality and functions of these cameras are actually pretty similar.

- Nikon D500.... 21MP, continuous shooting at up to 10 frames per second, 153-point AF (99 cross type)... $1900.
- Canon 7D Mark II... 20MP, 10 frames per second, 65-point AF (all cross type)... $1350.
- Nikon D7500... 24MP, 6 frames per second, 51-point AF (15 cross type)... $1250.
- Canon 80D... 24MP, 7 frames per second, 45-point AF (all cross type)... $1100.
- Nikon D7200... 21MP, 8 frames per second, 51-point AF (15 cross type)... $1000.

The 24MP sensors in 80D and D7500 would give you a bit of an edge for landscape/cityscape photography, in particular.

For wildlife/action, 20 or 21MP is usually plenty and all are APS-C cameras which allow you to use smaller, lighter, less expensive telephotos.

All five cameras have 100% optical viewfinders with high magnification (D500 and 7DII are 1.0X... the others are 0.94X or 0.95X). The eye relief on the Canon is around 22mm... on the Nikon it varies between 16 and 18mm approx.

For use with teleconverters, all five models have "f/8 capable" autofocus. D7200, D7500 and 7D Mark II have one "f/8" AF point at the center of the array. The D500 has 15 f/8-points. And the 80D has up to 27 f/8-points (varies depending upon the lens being used). f/8-capability allows some AF usability with an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM II lens combined with a 1.4X teleconverter on the Canon.... Or an AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6 VR lens and 1.4X teleconverter combo on the Nikon.

Yes, D500, 80D and D7500 all have articulated LCD screens. They also offer Touchscreen control.

7DII and D7200 LCD monitors aren't articulated and aren't Touchscreens.

Both the Canon 80D and 7DII have Dual Pixel Auto Focus while using that LCD screen in Live View mode (or shooting video). This is a new form of AF that's MUCH faster than the contrast detection method used on older Canon models. I am not sure how the Nikon models compare. I imagine they're pretty similar, but if you anticipate using Live View a lot you should investigate this for yourself. DPAF makes Live View much more useful on the more recent Canon cameras.

All these cameras have shutter speed ranges from 30 seconds to 1/8000 and flash sync of 1/250. I do not know if Nikon provides "shutter actuation" durability estimates, the way Canon sometimes does on some models... but the 7D Mark II is "rated" to do 200,000 "clicks". I haven't seen a rating for the 80D, but that tier of camera is typically 100,000 clicks. This isn't anything set in stone or even limited to the shutter mechanism alone. It's just an estimated "mileage/life span" expected of the cameras. Over the years most Canon models tend to exceed their ratings by fairly large margins. (I'd guess that very few DSLRs ever actually get "worn out".... I'd wager most folks upgrade to the "latest-and-greatest" long before that happens. I know I have! Shooting digital since 2004 and over that 13 years, I've used five different generations of DSLRs.)

And, yes, all the above have built-in WiFi connectivity, except for the 7DII which uses a $40 WiFi card in place of the SD memory card (a Compact Flash card slot remains available for image storage). Some of these cameras have NFC, which I know little about but appears to be an easier to use form of WiFi.

I'm not sure exactly what you want with WiFi. Just be aware that built-in WiFi has relatively limited range... 20 to 30 feet typically. It may be fine for remote control of the camera over short distances and to transfer the occasional JPEG to your phone so you can post it to your Facebook account. But may disappoint for volume wireless file transfer of larger RAW files to your laptop, tablet or phone. There are higher performance modules available for more "serious" file transfer and control over much greater distance. Canon's WFT-E7A (Ver. 2) for 7D Mark II, for instance, has a range of up to 400 feet... but costs nearly $800. Nikon offers similar performance and price WT-7A for use with D500. AFAIK, neither offers WFT modules like these for 80D, D7200, D7500 models. HOWEVER, there are third party wireless modules such as Camranger that cost a lot less (about $300), work with most cameras and give a working range up to about 100-150 feet. This also leaves all the memory card slots free to use for image recordings.

But look beyond the camera to the rest of the system: lenses and accessories. Both Canon and Nikon are good in this respect, but there are some differences. As a Canon user, I'm a bit jealous of the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 lens, for example. But I use Canon 100-400mm II and 500mm f/4 quite happily, which both incorporate fluorite elements for exceptional image quality (as have many of Canon's telephoto lenses for decades). Nikon has just recently revamped many of their telephotos to include fluorite, too. But they're charging a premium for their FL lenses. Compare the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM II for about $1900 with the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 FL VR for $2800. Both these use fluorite. They and many other lenses from each manufacturer are excellent, but you'll generally find Nikon lenses are more expensive than comparable Canon.

Personally I would NEVER buy a "do-it-all" 10X or greater zoom like an 18-200mm. IMO, those just compromise too much in various ways..

Plus, on APS-C cameras, for landscapes & cityscapes you're likely to want something wider than 18mm.

For example, I'd recommend...

ULTRAWIDE - Canon EF-S 10-18mm IS STM (at under $300, a budget ultrawide) or EF-S 10-22mm USM ($650, better built, larger max apertures). Comparable Nikkor AF-P 10-20mm VR is avail. (a little over $300), or there are Nikkor AF-S 10-24mm ($900) and AF-S 12-24mm ($1100). All are excellent. Plus there are a number of good third party lenses that might be worth consideration.

WALK-AROUND/GENERAL PURPOSE - Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM ($800) is a fairly compact & versatile possibility. Wider than most, may not need one of the ultrawides listed above (though there's a very big difference between 10mm and 15mm!). Or, maybe you want a larger aperture lens such as the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM ($800).... narrower range of focal lengths, but a sharp, fast, quality lens. I imagine Nikon offers similar, but am not all that familiar with them. The EF-S 18-135mm IS USM lens sold "in kit" with 80D is actually pretty darned good for general purpose.

CITYSCAPE/ARCHITECTURE - Canon offers Tilt-Shift and Nikon offers Perspective Control lenses for this purpose (among other things). Canon TS-E 17mm ($2150), 24mm II ($1900), 45mm ($1400, soon discontinued) and 50mm Macro ($2200)... or Nikkor PC 19mm ($3400), 24mm ($2200) and 45mm ($2050)... All offer movements that can be used to correct "keystoning" of buildings, control the plane of focus and more.

MACRO - Lots of options from both manufacturers, as well as third party lens makers. Something I REALLY like about Canon's two 100mm Macro lenses is that they can optionally be fitted with tripod mounting rings. No other manufacturer offers that on a macro lens shorter than 150mm. Nikon's 200mm is the only one they currently offer with a t'pod ring. Not sure if you are interested in macro or not, but Canon also offers a unique MP-E 65mm macro lens that goes as high as 5X magnification on it's own. In fact, the least magnification with it is 1X, where most other macros stop (and, it too has a t'pod mounting ring). Canon also has a relatively new EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM "walkaround" lens that's capable of near macro .70X magnification, which is twice or three times greater than most lenses of this type and might make carrying a separate macro lens less necessary. I don't know exactly how Nikon compares, but Micro-Nikkors have long been very well respected and I am sure there are a number of choices among those, too.

TELEPHOTO - Both manufacturers offers a number of superb, a$$-kickin' super tele primes.... with high four figure and even five figure price tags! Coming back down to earth, both offer reasonably compact 70-200mm and 70-300mm zooms, as well as 300mm f/4 IS/VR primes. Image stabilization - which Canon calls IS and Nikon calls VR - is nice on any lens, but especially important on these longer focal lengths. At around $1500 Nikon's 200-500mm f/5.6 VR is an very good choice, along with their somewhat higher performance, approx. $2000 AF-S 80-400mm VR. Canon's $2000 EF 100-400mm IS USM II is quite competitive too, and they have long offered a very well regarded EF 400mm f/5.6 USM prime (note: no IS on this lens, more likely to need a t'pod or monopod).

I mention image stabilization above and it's a great feature that Canon pioneered using in SLR/DSLR lenses beginning in the mid 1990s. 20 years later, everyone else has copied them and now offer one form of stabilization or another. Canon and Nikon make stabilized lenses. Pentax and Olympus put their stabilization in their camera bodies instead. Sony does a bit of both.

While all serve the same purpose, allowing steady shots at lower shutter speeds than you could in the past, each manufacturer's system is patented and there are differences. I've been using a number of different Canon IS lenses for over 15 years and hardly ever turn it off. It's very helpful and after making many hundreds of thousands of images with IS, I really wouldn't want to be without it on my telephotos (I like it on any lens, but IMO it's less important on shorter focal lengths and is of pretty limited assistance with macro.)

I see a lot of Nikon users turning off their VR at times because it's generally thought that it slows autofocus slightly. I don't know if that's true or not, or how much effect there is on Nikon AF. But with Canon I feel the opposite occurs... that IS actually helps aufofocus perform better. Stabilization is even more important with APS-C cameras, since they make lenses "behave" like they are much longer focal lengths. For example, a 300mm lens on my Canon APS-C camera "acts like" a 500mm on full frame/35mm film SLRs. Three or four stops worth of "assistance" from IS means I can get a reasonably high number of sharp, handheld shots with that 300mm lens at 1/60 or even 1/30.... where I would've needed to keep to around 1/500 without IS. (Note: Still need to keep shutter speeds up to stop subject movements, though.)

Another thing I like about Canon is that literally any EF or EF-S lens made the last 30 years is fully usable on and compatible with both 80D and 7D Mark II cameras. That's true of all the Canon APS-C cameras introduced from 2004 onward. Canon's "full frame", "APS-H" and earliest APS-C cameras cannot use EF-S lenses... but that's their only limitation. This extensive compatibility was made possible by Canon's painful-at-the-time clean break from their mechanical FD/FL lens mount used in the 1960s, 70s and 80s.... replacing it with the electronic EF mount beginning in the late 1980s.

Nikon, on the other hand, has made an effort to continue using the same F-mount that dates back to around 1959. But that's meant modifications and "tweaks" made to it many times over the years, effecting metering, aperture control and - more recently - autofocus. As a result, there are charts showing Nikon lens & camera compatibility and incompatibilities that it would be wise to consult before buying.... especially older, used lenses. Now, the D7000-series and D500 cameras are pretty broadly compatible (more-so than the D3000 and D5000-series). So at the level you're considering, there are unlikely to be many problems. Still, I'd recommend Googling "Nikon lens compatibility" and checking things out, just to be sure. Online Ken Rockwell generally isn't my favorite reviewer, but does a pretty good job describing Nikon designations and how the F-mount has developed over the years.

Finally, it's often recommended that folks trying to decide make trip to a store where they can handle and play around with the camera models under consideration. While I'm sure you could learn to use any of them, there are some ergonomic, design and control differences that might make one or another just seem more "comfortable" and fun to use. For example, some people find the Canon menus pretty intuitive and easy to use. Other folks prefer the Nikon designs and controls. See for yourself!

Hope this helps. Have fun shopping!



-

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Deleted

Chuck1313

If you decide to go with the d500 check out the one I have for sale on UHH. Less than 1000 shutter counts.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Paul, first, welcome to the forum. My tipping point in your dilemma is indicated in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE&t=784s after which I'd be prepared to visit http://camranger.com/ and view the videos there. I think the camranger would solve your wifi and wireless tethering issues without loss of a card slot for just under $300. Good luck with your decision.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

If you have to be able to use a good WiFi tool, check out the Panasonic LUMIX GH5 or forthcoming G9. The Panasonic app is great. I use it with my GH4 to trip the electronic shutter for vibration free images.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I am a Canon / Sony user. ......If you can AFFORD the Nikon stuff - that is my recommendation for you !

aellman Loc: Boston MA

OR why not rent a Nikon or Canon entry-level DSLR; approximate price $500 with kit lens. I think, as an "amateur retread," you may find that they give you everything you need vs. the increased performance and bells and whistles you don't need. As a point of refernce, my Sony alpha a350 ($250 pre-owned) gives me everything I need, and I consider myself a pretty serious and experienced photographer. If you go the route of a new entry-level, you will save 80% of the expenditure you are considering.

An example of an excellent entry-level DSLR is the NikonD3400. (There is a similar entry-level Canon model.)You can read a review from a well-respected source here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d3400-review/4 Note the NEXT PAGE button to continue to more of the review. (It's not obvious.)

TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT: Before you all come down on me like a sledgehammer, I get it that I'm a voice in the wilderness here. It's just one man's opinion. Save the space. >Alan

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Welcome to UHH!
As an owner of the Canon 80D I can highly recommend it as some others have. It has the articulated touch screen, built in wi-fi, 24Mp, dual pixel auto focus. While it isn't as strongly weather resistant as the 7D MKII, it is more so than the entry level models (T7i, etc). It is slightly slower than the 7D at 7 frames/sec. with 110 shot jpeg buffer, and is 0.4 lb lighter and less expensive leaving more $ for lenses, strobes, tripods, et al. You can compare the two at:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/compare/Canon_80D_vs_Canon_7D_Mark_II/BHitems/1225875-REG_1081808-DEMO

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Yes but not all features will work with even the AF types of lenses.
Please look at these charts.
https://www.nikonians.org/reviews/nikon-slr-camera-and-lens-compatibility

No such effort is needed with Canon. It has been 30 years since the EF has been introduced so FD etc is no issue anyway. Again the D500 is not 100% compatible with all lenses as the 7D MII is.

I have heard die hard Nikon fan boys try your sorry story over and over it is old and worn out. Just admit the truth and move on.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Wifi is an individual thing. While my Sony a6300 and a6000 both have built in wifi (Also communicate directly with my Samsung phone) I almost never use that feature. I almost always shoot raw and post=process. Take the card out, put it in the computer.

On the other hand, both my daughters love their cameras and use the wifi to send images on ???Instagram, FB, etc. One shoots a D3300 with an EyeFi card and the other a D7100 with a Toshiba Air ??? something. Their images are immediately on the cell phone and they can send them.

Don't confuse yourself with this "crop factor" nonsense. A lens is a lens. Once I learned that I could print 20x30 wall prints from my Nikon D90 (Back in the day) I just learned to use the lens that gave me the image I wanted.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The truth is the D500 is compatible with far more lenses than the 7DMII. The only AF lenses it does not work with are the two, count 'em, made for use only on the F3AF (no DSLR was ever compatible with F3AF lenses).

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

7D MII is compatible with 100% of the lenses and 100% of the features work 100% of the time Pretty high percentage.
PS Nikon made lenses that will not mount on the D500 without some adaption and some just can't be mounted without damage. You just can't stand the EF system was so far ahead of the old primitive F mount that Nikon was dropped by professionals actually needing to make money to the point of Nikon being irrelevant. Look at press cameras, sports venues etc. Nikon dominated nearly 100%. Not they are rare at best. Now 30 years later others are trying to catch up to the EF mount with primitive adaptations but there are still severe limitations especially for Nikon as to maximum aperture available with the primitive mount and many other weaknesses and that is why the EF mount has been so universally accepted for professional video cameras as well.