Vault Loc: Gig Harbor, WA and Yuma, AZ

I have been looking to step up my kit some and need input from users. I shoot Nikon D-40, D-3500, D-7100 and D-600. The D-750 and D-500 both seem like good fits to how and what I shoot. Astrophotography, landscape, walk around and wildlife are my favorites. My biggest concerns are... can the D-500 provide the details needed for my deep space shots, on a tracker, and is the D-750 enough of a step up from the D-600 to justify the cost. Thanks to all that see,read and respond.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

The D500 will be particularly well suited to wildlife. The D750 may be better with high iso astro work. Either one will be a major step up from what you have. Ask in the astro section here at UHH and see if one is better with hot pixels or ease of using live view for star focussing. If you are pushing weight limits with the tracker, the d500 will give you that dx edge allowing less beefy lenses for the same reach.

RoswellAlien

Have had D500s and they’re great cameras. As OrPhoto said, the DX bump on effective focal length is an advantage.

Vault Loc: Gig Harbor, WA and Yuma, AZ

Thank you

Vault Loc: Gig Harbor, WA and Yuma, AZ

Thank you

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Most every question is: NO

You already have multiple overlapping DSLRs. Moreover, you're asking to add still another duplicative DSLR into this stable, with no indication of giving up on the old cameras / sensor sizes / sensor formats.

DX cropped

D40 - 6.1MP
D7100 - 24MP
D3500 - 24MP

FX

D600 - 24MP

So, the candidates add nothing, other than more costs and GAS. The D500 is a 20MP DX camera, a step down in DX resolution from the duplicates you already have at 24MP. The D750 is just another 24MP FX sensor.

Obviously, there are other build features of the new camera(s), along with newer processors for ISO performance and noise. But, my point is your current stable of cameras does not show a 'strategy' to your prior purchases. The cameras you're taking about continue to lack a strategy.

If you want 'more details', you need more pixel resolution. If you want better (best) low light performance, you need an FX body with the latest EXPEED processor. All Nikon DSLRs are discontinued. They may still be sold 'new', but they're all 4+ years from their design and release, with no plans to every be replaced / updated in a DSLR format. If you're not ready to go FX mirrorless in the 45MP range, don't waste more money on still another DSLRinosaur.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

I respectfully disagree with Paul and do see a pattern. Thriftyness. Chances are each of these bodies was purchased long after their successors appeared, at greatly reduced prices. And now the same opportunities present with these two choices. I would argue that both of them represent significant advances over the current fleet. At this point the d40 should be donated to a museum.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I shoot much of what you shoot and would offer a couple of things to think about. I have three D500s which see regular use, a D810, and a couple of D850s.

The D500 is a wonderful camera. I will never sell any of mine. Its suitability for astrophotography depends completely on what "flavor" of astrophotography you want to do. 21 MP is pretty limiting for skyscapes, but can be fine for shooting through a telescope. If you learn the camera, it has plenty of low light sensitivity. Some complain about noise, but I believe that is a user problem. It can be great for wildlife, and I've never had a better walkaround camera. I am continually in search of these cameras for gifts.

The problem with the D500 is that most of them have been "rode hard and put up wet." It is difficult to find one on the individual market that is trustworthy to buy. Usually you can tell, but I recently bought one that had a bent front frame, probably from rough handling with a long lens mounted. It was totally not detectable visually. Nikon was able to fix it, but the repair cost was about $360. I now only buy when I find and can verify a nice one in a camera shop. Costs a little more, but much reduces the possibility of needing a costly and time-consuming repair. Shutter counts tend to be quite high, because these cameras are shot in high speed continuous mode a lot.

The D750 is a very nice camera, and owners are very loyal. I have not had one. I can tell you that I have never seen one at any astrophotography workshop that I have attended over the last 6 years. Used D810s and D850s are available for sometimes very little more money. I have found them to generally be in much nicer condition, sometimes with incredibly low shutter counts. The extra resolution is helpful for some subjects. I do not actively buy these models, though, so can't discuss the nitty gritty. I would tend to gravitate toward these models for a full frame option.

One thing to keep in mind is the serviceability of whatever you buy. The D810 either just has or very soon will pass out of support by Nikon. As of the first of the year, factory service was still available for the D500 and D850, but it will not be forever. Wildlife shooting can be rough on a camera, so that is something to consider.

Best wishes on whatever choice you make.

TonyP Loc: New Zealand

Actually you might be surprised at the price of a D40 now.
There seems to be a resurgence in the CCD sensor 'look'.
Over recent months there have been quite a few D40 videos popping up on my YouTube feed.