oregonfrank Loc: Astoria, Oregon

When I posted above that the D500 has a little higher pixel density than the D850, here is what I meant: the D850 has 53,263 pixels per sq.mm and the D500 has 56,647 per sq.mm, about a 6% difference, by my calculation at least. So,if you are shooting DX format with both cameras, there will be a little higher pixel density with the D500. Not saying the D850 doesn’t have other advantages. If I had the 500 PF and wanted more than 500mm focal length, I would use the D500, rather than a 1.4 TC on the D850, to keep the f5.6 aperture. Frank

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

The D850 has a BSI sensor the D500 has a standard BAR sensor why do you think the pixel density is higher on the DX sensor than on the FX sensor?

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

Not quite the same, you are talking about two different sensor type (not talking about DX and FX). If the DX sensor was the same size as the FX sensor you could compare it that way and the FX would come out ahead. Using the 500mm PF will not change the focal length only the crop factor.

oregonfrank Loc: Astoria, Oregon

[quote=Brucej67]Not quite the same, you are talking about two different sensor type (not talking about DX and FX). If the DX sensor was the same size as the FX sensor you could compare it that way and the FX would come out ahead. Using the 500mm PF will not change the focal length only the crop factor.[/e

If a DX sensor was the same size as an FX sensor, then they would both be FX sensors! I was comparing the DX (D500) sensor with the FX (D850) sensor cropped to DX size, and I found that the D500 had a little higher number of pixels per sq.mm of sensor surface by about 6%. I labeled it “density” of pixels per sq.mm, not total pixels. Of course the FX sensor has more total pixels than the DX sensor, but that was not my comparison. The context of my comment was using the 500 PF on the D500 or the D850 with the sensor cropped to DX. Given that arrangement, the D500 would function with about 6% more pixels than the D850 cropped. What is wrong with this comparison?
Frank

TonyBrown

Haven’t used my 200-500 since I got the 500PF. Great combined with D500.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

[quote=oregonfrank][quote=Brucej67]Not quite the same, you are talking about two different sensor type (not talking about DX and FX). If the DX sensor was the same size as the FX sensor you could compare it that way and the FX would come out ahead. Using the 500mm PF will not change the focal length only the crop factor.[/e

If a DX sensor was the same size as an FX sensor, then they would both be FX sensors! I was comparing the DX (D500) sensor with the FX (D850) sensor cropped to DX size, and I found that the D500 had a little higher number of pixels per sq.mm of sensor surface by about 6%. I labeled it “density” of pixels per sq.mm, not total pixels. Of course the FX sensor has more total pixels than the DX sensor, but that was not my comparison. The context of my comment was using the 500 PF on the D500 or the D850 with the sensor cropped to DX. Given that arrangement, the D500 would function with about 6% more pixels than the D850 cropped. What is wrong with this comparison?
Frank[/quote]

Nothing, while I agree with you that the D500 has better IQ than the D850 in crop mode that is a better comparison, that was not how I read the original post. The photo-sites on the D850 are closer together due to back photo-site wiring than the standard BARE sensor on the D500 which are side wired, this results in more light being captured on the D850 than the D500 given the same amount of time and settings. So for illumination (perhaps night shots) the D850 will top the D500 even in crop mode.

oregonfrank Loc: Astoria, Oregon

Bruce, thanks for clarifying. I was not saying either camera is better than the other, in general. I was simply trying to add one dimension to the discussion of using the 500 PF on the D500 and D850 in cropped format. I have and like both bodies. Frank

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

Agree.