New Nikon D5 What's up with that?
Jan 6, 2016 13:13:35 #
CatMarley wrote:
Ok, the d5 is for speed, the 810 for quality. So what gives with the 500? It is the top of the APS-C line to replace the 7200, and it TOO is a 20 MP instead of 24. !!!
Maybe it is a sensor semiconductor technology thing. High resolution typically seems to result in smaller pixels given that the sensor size is fixed for either FF or APS-C. Smaller pixels typically mean lower light sensitivity.
Unless Nikon ( or Sony, if Sony makes these senors ) can modify the laws of physics and economics then trade offs have to made to deliver a product on time and on cost to make it competitive in the market. It looks as though Nikon has done a good job with these products, but it is almost impossible to be perfect with every attribute.
Jan 6, 2016 14:18:04 #
CatMarley wrote:
Ok, the d5 is for speed, the 810 for quality. So what gives with the 500? It is the top of the APS-C line to replace the 7200, and it TOO is a 20 MP instead of 24. !!! I seems Nikon is not playing the "more is better" game.
Yes, Nikon is playing the "more is better" game with this camera. It is not made to replace the D7200 or any other consumer camera from Nikon. It is made to replace the D300s camera that only has about half of everything or less than that in comparison with this new D500. The D500 is a budget pro camera, not consumer camera, and the very best camera in this category Nikon has ever made, also with the highest megapixel count. And both the D5 and D500 have a new level of ISO capabilities not seen in cameras until now. The D500 can go up to ISO 1,6 million when needed in the darkest situations. D5 can go one stop further. Just check how many cameras you will find that can do this from any other manufacturer. The answer is 0.
Jan 6, 2016 14:37:10 #
CatMarley wrote:
Ok, the d5 is for speed, the 810 for quality. So what gives with the 500? It is the top of the APS-C line to replace the 7200, and it TOO is a 20 MP instead of 24. !!! I seems Nikon is not playing the "more is better" game.
The D500 is more of a specialized camera aimed at sports and birding offering 10 fps that can shoot 79 consecutive 14-bit raw shots in burst mode. The 7200 gives you 6 fps with 27 raw images in burst.
It's not about megapixels always as mentioned. Both Canon & Nikon's flagships have been mostly below 20 megapixel to date giving you the high burst rate.
Jan 6, 2016 15:02:59 #
CatMarley wrote:
Only 20.8 MP? What happened to 50MP? Aren't all you pixel peepers out there seething with frustration?
Life's a compromise, and so are electronics. With its high speed shooting and low light capability, shooters will be satisfied with 20MP.
Jan 6, 2016 16:21:00 #
CatMarley wrote:
You know that, and I know that, but I have seen quite a few posters here harrumphing about how 36MP was so superior to 24 MP and now the Nikon Pro flagship has only 20???? Heresy!!! I am quite satisfied with my Fuji 16 MP, but am told I am a backward Yokel for thinking that is enough. And the new 500 has a touchscreen! Another thing the purists have been sneering at. I think it's great - got the 5500 just because of it.
The flagship should have less MP (D5, 1Dx). Highest MP cameras are the one of the second tier (i.e D810, 5Ds). Besides most of those pictures taken with camera like the D5 are for magazines and even with 2 page spread you don't need more than 20MP.
Jan 6, 2016 18:02:26 #
CatMarley wrote:
It seems Nikon is not playing the "more is better" game.
It seems Nikon is not playing the "more is better" game.
I HATE IT WHEN THAT HAPPENS!!!!!!!!!!! :lol: :lol:
SS
Jan 6, 2016 18:21:02 #
SharpShooter wrote:
I HATE IT WHEN THAT HAPPENS!!!!!!!!!!! :lol: :lol:
SS
SS
Perhaps it is simply Dickensian: "Please sir, I want some more!"
Twisty! It's tough being orphaned!
Jan 7, 2016 02:24:33 #
The image capability is more than sufficient. What is insane is that the ISO can be pushed to 3,280,000. I have always wanted a picture of a raven at midnight in a cloudy forest!
Jan 7, 2016 05:48:52 #
Yes! Nothing beats more megapixels! At least 36mp should be next. I have been taking photos since I was a kid out in the desert with my fathers Pentax using up a roll of film on a sunset and he sayin "&%^#! You used up all the film!" I studied photography at MICA. My 24 megapixel Nikon is a dream come true at the end of my life long quest for a sharp photo and I can crop to my hearts delight and still have fantastic detail. Sure, continous speed is good for the commercial photographers and low light is a good concern but it is not worth giving up for. Of course this is a commercial product and we all make artistic sacrifices to make a buck. I still haven't gotten to the end of the rainbow where there is infinite detail and no noise in a low light shot - a perfect picture by moonlight is my hearts desire! When oh Lord, when? The good news is I don't have to get jealous for a while longer yet. I have 24! I win! And I can't afford a new one anytime soon.
CatMarley wrote:
Only 20.8 MP? What happened to 50MP? Aren't all you pixel peepers out there seething with frustration?
Jan 7, 2016 05:59:10 #
dear cat, you have a point there, however, I own a nikon D800 which has 36 megs. but I shoot at 20 megs because at 36 megs the files it creates are hugh, and even though I have a brand new iMac with a hugh 2 terabyte hard drive, it would fill it in no time..........and 20 megs are more then sufficient, to create beautiful photographs, that I print on my Epson wide carriage printer to poster size, that come out needle sharp, with beautiful color and rendition.....
Jan 7, 2016 06:09:18 #
DaveHam
Loc: Reading UK
No.
High ISO capability is not something you get with huge photosite density.
Fast frame rate is not something you get either.
Ease of use handheld is better at 20mp than 50.
This is a pro camera aimed at pros. They generally have little interest in huge pixel counts, for that they have the D810 or medium format.
High ISO capability is not something you get with huge photosite density.
Fast frame rate is not something you get either.
Ease of use handheld is better at 20mp than 50.
This is a pro camera aimed at pros. They generally have little interest in huge pixel counts, for that they have the D810 or medium format.
Jan 7, 2016 06:29:03 #
The flagship "pro" cameras from both N and C are lower MP cameras.
Says something about the megapixel war, image quality and marketing.
Says something about the megapixel war, image quality and marketing.
Jan 7, 2016 06:32:16 #
CatMarley wrote:
Only 20.8 MP? What happened to 50MP? Aren't all you pixel peepers out there seething with frustration?
It's a trade off of pixels vs. ISO.
--Bob
Jan 7, 2016 06:56:00 #
Jan 7, 2016 07:00:48 #
DaveHam
Loc: Reading UK
rmalarz wrote:
It's a trade off of pixels vs. ISO.
--Bob
--Bob
True plus marketing.
Never fails to amaze me how many people go out and buy a D800/810 and then use it in crop format. Why? What is the point? To save disk space? Disk space is very cheap at the present and likely to remain so. Buy a D7200 instead.
I suppose the why is because DxO says its 'the best' (on a lab bench), but if you are not going to use the functionality then why spend the money?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.