Meemz

I have the Nikon D810 and was going to wait until the new whatever they want to call it was going to come out and upgrade. I dropped my 810. I went up and talked to the Nikon guy and they said D5 was just too heavy.. my husband surprised me and got me the D5 .. The difference was unbelievable. It's not that heavy and the pictures are amazing. I also have the new 70 to 200 lens and I get pictures that I just can't hardly believe. I didn't think the difference was going to be so great. I haven't tried landscapes with it yet but I have shot sports with it and portrait photos an the the difference is just unreal . The color is so much better. And the focusing is much better too. Sharpness is better. In the speed and focusing together it is amazing . I haven't printed out anything super large yet so I don't know how that's gonna work out. I was thinking about getting the 105 Lens for portraits but I kind of shake sometimes and let me tell you that 70 to 200 is just wonderful . So far I am in love with this camera . And the editing time is so much less ...usually I take the photo over to Photoshop then bump up the color so on. With the D5 Lightroom only ...pretty much straight out of the camera .

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

Don't overlook the D500 for sports coupled with the new 70-200 FL. It's awesome.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

of course it is a real question.
What about the D5 is really advanced, what is only an enhancement, what is just a fix,
what feature doesn't work well, what does it do that no other camera can match,
what wonderful new scientific break thru does it share with no other camera...?
Is a product targeted at a specific market base advanced or only specialized..?
Wonderful low noise at high ISO but was that an advancement or
just a factory dictated in camera denoise that cripples the image?

of course it is a for real question.

Meemz

Some of my friends have both the D5 and the D500 ... they do love the 500 .. I haven't shot with it so I can't really say. I do like the way it's made. And it is a lot lighter w/out the battery grip... but I had the lenses for the full frame and went w/that. You can use most of the full frame lens on the D500. And for my unstable hand and how heavy the D5 is I just use a tripod... I just take an extra grandkid around w/me an have them carry some of the gear. A Little extra money for them ...

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Heartily agree on the D3S - there is just something about that particular sensor that hit the sweet spot.

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

... I think you are trying to justify an old camera and creating myths.


D3s MK4

DxO Overall Score 82 91
DxO Color Depth 23.5 24.8
DxO Dynamic Range 12.0 13.6
DxO Low Light ISO 3253 2995

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

The biggest 'advancement' in the Nikon D5 is the use of a separate microprocessor for focusing only. As an owner of the D5 since release I can tell you that this alone is a game changer. There is only one other camera with that feature, the D500, and I also own one of those. The D5 is simply the finest camera for sports action available today. The D810, a camera I also own, is really a fantastic body, very useful for pretty much everything except action sports -- too small of a buffer. I'm sure Canon has some fine equipment as well, but I can only afford one system. Finally, even though I am a pro, my opinion only matters to me -- you are completely to think and buy exactly what you want. I buy and use whatever I need to complete the task at hand. Best of luck.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

ABSOLUTELY SO!

tomcat

Just trying to point out that the larger pixel size is superior, dude. Those numbers you quoted leave out the subjective part of any review and that is: what does the image look like? By the way, what is an "MK4''? Never heard of it....

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

Nice try, but you should check your facts. Everything you said is wrong.

First, the D5 uses a more powerful processor than the D810.

Second, there is a full frame camera (Sony A99ii) that has 42 megapixels, and it can capture 12 frames per second with full autofocus and autoexposure (like the 20.8Mp D5). So the number of megapixels on the sensor has little or nothing to do with frame rate or focus time.

Third, focus speed has nothing to do with the number of megapixels on the image sensor in either the D810 or the D5, because neither camera use the image sensor to focus. The both use a separate sensor to focus. (The Sony A99ii actually uses more AF points on its AF sensor than the D5.)

Fourth, The D810 has better S/N that the D5 at ISOs up to and including ISO 12800, and the D810 has significantly better dynamic range up to ISO 800. So the which camera has the "quality pixels"?

BebuLamar

Hehe! It's advanced as it has fewest number of pixels. Oops The Df has fewer.

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

I agree with almost everything you said. But regarding ISO: The D5 signal-to-noise ration is better than the D810 signal-to-noise ratio only above ISO 12,800.

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

Not necessarily. The Sony A99ii is a full frame, 12 frames-per-second, 42 megapixel camera. The number of pixels on the image sensor (twice as many as in the D5) didn't slow it down.

Dan De Lion Loc: Montana

------

I see two reasons for the D5's 20mp sensor. First, today's lenses, be they gold ringed Nikkors or L'ed Canon's, don't offer resolutions sufficient to justify sensors larger than 24mph. The rest of the MPs on 36, 42, and 49mp sensors are wasted and only add to file bloat. There are exceptions to this in studio settings using extremely fine techniques and a very few excellent prime lenses that don't offer AF and VR.

The second reason has already been covered. That D5's large pixels give it extremely good high ISO performance (best in class.) Interestingly, the D5's low ISO performance is just so-so, and is easily beaten by the older D750.

-----

lautenk2

I think "Speed Kills" is a traffic cop slogan, not sports, certainly not ice hockey. In the Air Force we say "Speed is Life."