lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

I am using my Nikkor 70-200 F2.8 and a Tamron 200-600 when I need additional reach, on my D800, to shoot my grandson's soccer games. I use back focus, auto ISO, shutter priority (at least 1000th of a second) 9 focus points, and continuous shooting mode I am getting satisfactory if not always professional results. I like the advantage, provided by the full frame camera, of being able to loosely frame the subject and then crop to a "best" image.

This said, I am very aware of how highly rated the D500 is for Sports Photography; and how it provides the ability to shoot more FPS while utilizing a better autofocusing system than the D800.

The D500 would replace my beloved D300, which I do not use to shoot games; but otherwise works well.

I think I understand that autofocus, and the capacity to follow moving subjects is a product of camera body and lens design. The lenses will remain the same; but will I experience advantages using the D500 rather than the D800? I expect to have to adjust to having far less "room" to crop.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Save your money.

OnDSnap Loc: NE New Jersey

The D500 is 2nd only to the D5. Which I use both for sports. Go for it, you certainly won't be disappointment.

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

Well, so far two opposing opinions.
I hope that someone can tell me specially what the D500 contributes to sport shooting other than the ability to shoot more frames/second. Does it focus more quickly and accurately? Does it “follow” a moving athlete better? ( When I ask “more accurately” and “better” I am referring to my D800)

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

There is no question that the D500 focuses more quickly and will follow the action more quickly. For most wildlife shooting, the FPS is not a big deal for me. I do thousands of birds, kids sporting events, etc, and for the most part, a lot of maximum FPS means more of the same pics to weed through. At a birthday party, perhaps the extra FPS may catch that perfect moment of pursed lips blowing out candles...not a deal breaker. I often switch back and forth from my D500 to my D850, and I prefer them to my D810 and frankly my D7100 is adequate.
Hoping to achieve better framing as a possible motive contributed to my dissenting opinion.

OnDSnap Loc: NE New Jersey

Yes to your Q's if setup correctly, better than the D800 specifically, I don't know cause I skipped over the D800. I use the D850, D3s, D500 & D5 for all my sports which is about 80% of my shooting. To answer your questions in a nut shell, I could have gotten away with a 2nd D500 instead of purchasing a D5. Although the D5 does handle low light and higher ISO's better. Why not just rent one and see for yourself. One mans toy isn't necessarily another man's joy.

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

To the two gentlemen who provided very useful information...I thank you.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...The D500 would replace my beloved D300, which I do not use to shoot games; but otherwise works well..." lesdmd there is indeed a very elegant and cost effective solution to your desire for high frame rate...

And in spite of the accolades which surround the D500 here is another thought on the highly rated D500.... This is the only camera I returned to B&H after shooting two league soccer games in a weekend... Why? Image Quality and want of dynamic range... yes the flagship DX DSLR D500 has lots of compelling features but dynamic range isn't one of them in my humble estimation... And those in denial who claim there is virtually no difference between it's sensor's 20.9 megapixel resolution and that of the D7200 sensor's is 24.72-megapixel resolution may need to rethink this... however they still insist to extolling it's virtues....

However DxOMark believes otherwise... and they have been testing sensor for quite some time... btw their findings echo mine... https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/

DxOMark rates the D7200 as virtually equal to the Nikon D5 in sensor score with an over all of 87 verses 88 while the D500 is far behind at 84... even more telling is dynamic range score (most important for IQ) with the D500 clocking in at 14.0 again far below the D7200 at 14.6. Nope if you need a camera that is equally capable of shooting portraiture, fashion/beauty narratives the D500 may not be a wise option.

lesdmd my best advice to you is to pick up a used MB-10 battery grip and with a Nikon EN-EL4a battery... this combo on your D300 will give you 8fps no problem... albeit you'll need to switch to 12bit RAW to realize this... there are lots of MB-10's available (cheap) on eBay or if you prefer a slightly higher price from KEH, B&H etc.

This combo works extremely well (I have this piece of kit) and in bright daylight the D300 yields very good results indeed... The only issue is with the D300 is it's rather serious limit on high ISO performance... You'll want to set Auto ISO to top out at 1600 max... which even for a 5.6 aperture is totally doable... ISO 400 will give you 1/2000 second in bright daylight at even f/8!

If you do find that the high frame rate is where you want to be, then you might consider the D500 and join the spray and pray crowd... lol yep, you can fill memory cards very quickly with the D500.

btw, I rarely shoot sports now... the revenue stream simply isn't there... too much effort for too little recompense... but shooting for your grandson's soccer games can be an often is virtually priceless...

Hope this helps lesdmd or is at least food for thought...
And while I'm a tad late to this dance I realize there are likely many other D300 owners who may ponder over the high price tad on the D500...

I wish you all well on your journey...

Nikon D500

(Download)

Nikon D500

(Download)

Nikon D500

(Download)

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

Thank you so much, Thomas902, for taking the time and for such an excellent detailed response.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

lesdmd here is my D300 with the Nikon MB-D10 Battery Grip attached...
Simply set your NEF RAW size to 12 bits an you'll have 8 frames per second...

Also note you'll need the Nikon EN-EL4a battery & Charger (image attached)
Since the D700 used the same MB-D10 Grip and EN-EL4a battery there are virtually hundreds now available at bargain prices...

Here is Nikon's Manual for the MB-D10
http://www.nikonsupport.eu/europe/Manuals/MB-D10/MB-D10_En_01.pdf
Note: You'll also need the BL-3 Chamber Cover (see Nikon's MB-D10 Manual, k?)

Again, hope this helps since it is a very cost effective alternative to consider for 8fps...
BTW, with that very powerful battery your AF speed will dramatically increase...
At least this is my experience with the the MB-D10 and EN-EL4a
.

Nikon D300 with an MB-D10 Grip

(Download)

EN-EL4a Battery Charger

(Download)

OnDSnap Loc: NE New Jersey

Quote
"If you do find that the high frame rate is where you want to be, then you might consider the D500 and join the spray and pray crowd... lol yep, you can fill memory cards very quickly with the D500."

"the revenue stream simply isn't there"

That so called spray and pray crowd you refer to just happens to be where you get that moment or expression almost impossible without dumb luck or unsurpassed timing that very few have. As far as a revenue stream...check out Peter Millers You Tube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=aQpyqIBU0mU
and the web site of GF Crew. If your willing to do the work, the revenue is there. https://www.gfcrew.com/

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

Thank you so much for your thoughtful feedback OnDSnap... I enjoyed Peter Millers' infomercial... Peter makes a valid initial inference... i.e. have a client you're working for... This is precisely my working model... and the only reason I'm out on the soccer pitch in the pouring rain or baking hot sun... Yes it does work for me, albeit maybe not for everyone.

And please don't misunderstand my thoughts on the D500 it is a fabulous one trick pony... and sadly the only robust true DX replacement for the rugged pro build quality of the D300... The D500 does what it does extremely well and as such is superb for action sports and BIF... That said, it does not meet my expectations in the IQ realm so I've found better solutions for my particular workflow... Others have markedly different views here which is why there is a healthy diversity amounst commercial photographers...

Ok, Peter's advice has some serious issues... First in my league you are going to be asked to remove yourself from the sideline of the soccer pitch if you are wearing a bright yellow vest... Officials are the only ones adorned in Bright Yellow... Period! Second only Team Captains wear Yellow Wrist bands in the league I shoot...

OnDSnap in the league I deal with there are rigid protocols to be honored.... Like never stand behind the penalty area... and in some case the endline... Never stand on the "Coaches" side of the field... I've become well know in my venue for always wearing neutral dark gray while on the sidelines of the pitch... I absolutely do not want to be a distraction for the officials nor the players.

After a match I'm always queried by parents & players seeking free imagery who ask where they can find my work to which I simply reply "I'm here on an assignment, thank you..."

As for Peter's "hot chick" Lauren hustling GFCrew's Yellow Vest? Really?
Peter is trolling for males... sorry that move is so very sexist...
I shoot a girls soccer league... and I'm keenly aware of the chauvinist aura which surrounds the sport.
It is so sad that the US Women's Soccer Team isn't paid equally with the US Men's Soccer Team although they are far more popular and have done more for the sport of Girl's Soccer than any other entity... end of rant...

I wish you well with your endeavors with the GF Crew business model...
Really glad you've found it works well for you...
All the best on your journey OnDSnap

mikeroetex Loc: Lafayette, LA

In the 1970's, we manual focused to a spot and waited for the action to pass by and tried to time our shutter button squeeze to match. And we waited a day to develop and see if we got the shot! Of course you can continue with the D300 or D800.

But times have changed and technology makes life easier. The D500 has a much deeper buffer, more focus points, a newer (better?) AF system, 5 different AF ways to follow the action (I use Group AF), more FOV reach (crops for you in camera), more FPS, enough tonal range for sports that the non-professional naked eye cannot tell a difference (it's sports, not landscape art). The Af will lock onto a bird in flight and follow them with no worry.

Some will still swear by the D3s as legendary for multi-purpose and low light. If I could not afford a D5 and wanted a big tank of a tool, I would get that one! But I love the compact feel and lightness of the D500 with a battery grip and may find myself adding a Z6 soon for more than astrophotography.

Your mileage may vary, but I can tell you this first shot was at the request of a parent to "get a good one" of her girl in action. I laid the hammer down for a 10-20 shot sequence as she came straight at me and this was shot number 14-ish. I don't think my old D750 would have been up to the task. My framing isn't perfect, but i was able to roll my zoom from 150mm to 70mm while holding the BBF in AF-C and not worry about AF.
This second shot was from about 60-70 yds away and I probably did a 5-8 shot burst. It is cropped, but can stand the pixel peeping test to see how well Group AF works!

(Download)


(Download)

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

Mike these are both so precious... and these little ladies are certainly moving within that limits of 1/800...

The first image is totally epic... razor sharp and speaks well of the D500 abilities to achieve a high level of acuity... The only concern with the second image is where the heavily shadowed eye area is pushing the dynamic range of the sensor even at it's basement ISO 100... possibly your use of Spot Metering Mode may have played into the mix here... albeit it's always a trade off between blown highlights and excessive noise in the deep shadows... Typically there is always hope in post to recover either way...

Gota love that AF-S 70-200mm f/4.0G ED IF VR... At a "civilized" 850g it is almost half the weight of the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED IF VR II... Which makes it an absolute dream to handle on set or on the soccer pitch... btw, this is only Nikon's second attempt at a constant f/4 aperture in 70-200mm range... I have (and LOVE) the Vintage (circa 1986) AF 70-210mm f/4 Nikkor... It is my go to in the studio for when I have to change positions quickly... razor sharp and never hunts or misses focus... Which is astonishing considering this was one of Nikon's first AF lens... Sadly they only produced it for a year before replacing it with the variable aperture pumper AF 70-210mm f/4-5.6D... Albeit this "D" variant does focus lighting fast...

Totally understand your mindset that a deep buffer and lengthy runs can sometimes yield astonishing results... I use to love my D3, albeit didn't enjoy sorting through over a thousand images for one soccer match... In time I've become one with half the frame rate which currently works for my needs... Though many obviously have other thoughts here...

I'll be very interested in your efforts with Nikon's mirror-less Z series, especially in regard to action sports... Again thank you for sharing Mike... love those little young soccer stars...

mikeroetex Loc: Lafayette, LA

Thanks Thomas and thank you for sharing your knowledge and expertise. You always make me think and re-think and that's a healthy thing. Far more in-depth than I could muster alone and I always learn something from your posts!