Nikon D800+D500 vs Nikon D850 (Page 3): Great shots Steve. I’m going to go broke trying to keep up with you. LOL Just kidding. D500 and 209-500 works great for me. Heading out in...

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Steve Perry wrote:

A couple additional thoughts based on the comments thus far...

1. Two cameras are better than one since you have a backup: While I do tend to take an extra body with me on trips, I also want to point out that in over 30 years of photography - many of those years shooting professionally and putting massive numbers of images through the camera - I've had exactly zero camera failures. I think for the casual shooter, a single body is just fine, especially if it's a pro caliber body. Sure, you take a risk, but it's a small one IMO with the benefits of the D850 outweighing the backup benefits of a D500 + D810. IMO.

2. One lens per body, no switching lenses: OK, this isn't a bad way to go and I have done it before. Especially if one is set for landscapes and one for wildlife.

3. The D850's is slower than the D500: From an AF position, I disagree. I've shot nearly 30,000 photos already with my D850 (and the same number or more with my D500) and I find the AF equally fast for action in both bodies. The D500 is 1 FPS faster than a gripped D850, 3 FPS faster for a non-gripped D850. The D500 also has a better buffer, although hitting the D850 buffer is a rarity in real world shooting if you're set up properly (i.e. using 12 bit after ISO 400, taking advantage of crop modes, etc). IMO, having a the full frame body with what amounts to a DX camera built right in outweighs the minor advantages the D500 has over the D850 (gripped D850 - non gripped, the D500 starts looking better).

The reason I seem so hell-bent on the D850 is simple. After using it the last several months, I notice I miss a lot less action shots that I do with other bodies thanks to the pixel density. In the past, I'd shoot my D5 and D500 for wildlife and I was always swapping bodies for more or less reach, often missing shots in the process. With the D850, if the subject is only taking up the DX area and I need the shot, I go ahead and fire away, knowing I'm capturing what I would have had with my D500. As the subject gets closer, I don't try to switch to my D5 - I just keep shooting and putting more pixels on the subject as it fills more and more of the frame.

One final note - keep in mind that I am primarily a prime shooter so the advantages of not swapping bodies means more to me than a zoom lens shooter. However, I did want to share my experience.

More D850 info / setting, etc on my review page:

https://backcountrygallery.com/nikon-d850-review/

Finally, a few D850 photos just for fun (mix of action and stills)

A couple additional thoughts based on the comments... (show quote)

Great shots Steve. I’m going to go broke trying to keep up with you. LOL
Just kidding. D500 and 209-500 works great for me. Heading out in Bradenton with them right now.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

rossen wrote:

I have a D800 which I have used to great success f... (show quote)

Here's my take on it. For many years I have always owned two camara bodies and nearly always take them out together. In the winter and early spring I will typically have one camera set up with a long zoom for birds in flight/wildlife in motion and the other with a long prime set up for perched birds/stationary wildlife. In the warmer months when there are inscets about, I have a macro on one and a long zoom/prime for everything else. I seldom miss a shot throughy having the wrong lens/camera settings. I have a D500 and an Olympus EM1 mark II and would not swap either for a D850; though it is the only full frame camera that I would buy. Personally, I would just add the D500 if I were you.

qualtalk

Steve Perry wrote:

(i.e. using 12 bit after ISO 400, taking advantage of crop modes, etc)

Steve, just wondering about the 12-bit suggestion - is this because the lower quality of the images above ISO 400 negates the benefit of 14-bit images? Thanks!

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

Steve Perry wrote:

The D850 easily replaces the D800 and D500. It's better than the D800 in every way and if you add a grip, it basically has a D500 built right in.

Notwithstanding the extra reach (magnification) the smaller DX sensor (D500) has?

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

qualtalk wrote:

Steve, just wondering about the 12-bit suggestion - is this because the lower quality of the images above ISO 400 negates the benefit of 14-bit images? Thanks!

Yes, basically. Above 400, the camera is only really grabbing 12 bits of useful data.

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

BboH wrote:

Notwithstanding the extra reach (magnification) the smaller DX sensor (D500) has?

The thing is, the dx area of the D850 is 19.4mp - nearly the same res of the D500. So, there’s really not an extra reach advantage.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

IDguy wrote:

Yes, but when I travel in the National Parks I keep a wide angle lens on the FX camera and a wildlife lens (200-500) on the DX camera. Although landscapes wait on you critters often not.

It has been D5300 and D800. Refurb D5600 is on its way. Refurb D850 will replace D800 when they become available. Or when I run out of patience.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

IDguy wrote:

Yes, but when I travel in the National Parks I keep a wide angle lens on the FX camera and a wildlife lens (200-500) on the DX camera. Although landscapes wait on you critters often not.

It has been D5300 and D800. Refurb D5600 is on its way. Refurb D850 will replace D800 when they become available. Or when I run out of patience.

rcdovala

How is it that you managed to "borrow" a camera from Nikon?

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

This is pretty much the same situation I find myself in right now. I traded my D810 for a D850, but have kept my D500. My primary camera is a D5 as I shoot mostly sports action. Since I've put my D850 to use, I have also not used the D500 and have been thinking about trading it in. One BIG advantage of the D500 is that it is fairly light without the grip and with a 20/2.8D lens -- I like this feature, perhaps my future point-n-shoot? Happy Holidays to ALL!

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

cjc2 wrote:

This is pretty much the same situation I find myself in right now. I traded my D810 for a D850, but have kept my D500. My primary camera is a D5 as I shoot mostly sports action. Since I've put my D850 to use, I have also not used the D500 and have been thinking about trading it in. One BIG advantage of the D500 is that it is fairly light without the grip and with a 20/2.8D lens -- I like this feature, perhaps my future point-n-shoot? Happy Holidays to ALL!

LOL. Future point and shoot. Love it.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Got to love the terns.

Indiana Loc: Huntington, Indiana

dcampbell52 wrote:

The D500 is a Crop Sensor / DX camera which is nic... (show quote)

I for one appreciate your discussion and rationale for cropping in post processing. Thanks

therwol Loc: USA

rmalarz wrote:

I've been using a D800e for about a year and a half now. When I heard/read about the D850 my response was lukewarm. It's not going to do much more than I can with my 800e. To this day, I don't know for a fact that I've ever seen on in person. Though, I've been to my camera store numerous times. To me, the difference of 36.3 to 45.7 wasn't enough to quicken my pulse. At least, not enough to warrant paying $3000+ for minor improvements.
--Bob

I don't think that you're going to see much difference in FF pictures between the D800e and D850 unless you've spent a fortune on the best lenses. On the other hand, the D850 gives you 20 megapixels in the DX mode, more than enough for most photographs, and it's much faster in every way than the D800/810 cameras. If you need the speed, then there is a reason for an upgrade (or buy a D500 as a second camera. Have you noticed that there aren't too many comments about the D5 in these discussions? Cost? Weight?)

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

Steve Perry wrote:

The thing is, the dx area of the D850 is 19.4mp - nearly the same res of the D500. So, there’s really not an extra reach advantage.

Going to show my incomplete(?) knowledge:
Magnification is determined by dividing the horizontal width of the sensor by the horizontal width of the angle of view of the lens. Don't understand what MP has to do with it?