Yes, the Nikon's DR is better than the Canon although I've noticed with my 80D and 5D mk IV, Canon's engineers are putting some effort in improving their sensors. But realistically, the extra amount of detail one can pull out of the shadows on images taken with the Nikon really isn't than much of a deal.
I do have several pretty good lenses, in the Canon EF mount, most of my Canon lenses are L series lenses. My Nikkor lenses were all quite expensive and the only DX lens I have is the D500's kit lens which isn't a kit lens at all, just maybe one of the best DX lenses made. Other than Canon and Nikkor, I have a Tamron SP lens and a couple Sigma 150-600 lenses, one Sport (Canon) and one Contemporary (Nikon), so I believe I may have a few of what you referred to as better lenses. Anyway, my point being, from my experience, image quality actually varies based on different things, one of which weighs in heavily is the subject.
The D500 is definitely capable of really good IQ but then so is my 5D mk IV or my original 5D series camera, the SR.

I see your point but don't completely agree with it. I have a D500 and I really like that camera. Here's the problem, the OP is most likely a newbie to DSLR'S and possibly digital photography. The D500 is Nikons flagship crop sensor camera. I've been into digital photography and digital cameras for around 17 years now and I've owned my D500 for close to a year now and I'm still learning the camera. Granted, it is not my only camera so I don't use it all the time but, I do use it alot, for both stills and video and it has been more difficult to learn than any of my Canons were. I've only had the 5D mk IV for 5 months and I know more about that than my D500.
The camera's the OP is considering are not beginning camera's, nor are they flagship cameras. What they are is decently equipped camera's that will offer the OP and excellent learning opportunities while supplying good images, all for a very affordable price. This way the OP can find their interests in digital photography and subjects and applications and maybe start building a lens base to capture the types of images of interest to them. If the OP leans toward wildlife and things like BIF, then save towards a specialty body like the D500 or 7D mk III.
By the way, when I say I don't completely agree with you, it doesn't mean I disagree.

I really need to get a new phone, typing on my old Galaxy S3 with badly cracked screen is quite the adventure...

Great minds, especially those with the same name, the R is for Robert, think alike.

Good spot for a nest and a photo...

Grey market has nothing to do with who made the camera. It has everything to do with the authorized importer.
Someone posted Nikon USA or Nikon Melville is not part of Nikon Corporation, yes, it is. It is Nikon's branch in the USA.
If you purchase a camera, Canon, Nikon, whatever, outside the USA while traveling and keep the receipt as proof of purchase, Nikon USA will honor the manufacturers warranty, as will Canon. The big difference between the two companies, if you can't provide proof of purchase, Nikon will probably not service your camera, Canon will for a fee. Grey market is created by the manufacturer in the first place. It is the manufacturer that sells their product to anyone, regardless of where the purchasing entity intends to resell the product. If the cost of the product was based on exchange rates and all warranties were issued by the manufacturer basically there would be little incentive to sell or buy Grey market, there would be little to no profit. But Nikon USA has to mark up the price and charge consumers for a warranty that hopefully one never needs to use. It's like buying a product in a store and the cashier asks you if you want to buy an extended warranty, except Nikon USA doesn't give you the option to say no. Nikon USA is an importer and an insurance company, as is Canon USA.

Yes, if the point of discussion is the war, then who started it is totally relevant, but, in this case, the point of discussion isn't the war or who stated it, it is who was the president at the time the war started. At the start of the US civil war in 1861 the sitting president and commander and chief of US military forces was Abraham Lincoln.

It only takes 2 days to ship it to Japan. If they are anything like Canon service, they will fix it as quickly as possible, usually under 7 days. Realistically, you could have it back in under 2 weeks to 3 weeks.

Both decent cameras. Get the one you feel will be easiest to learn and use and can get the best deal on.
Personally, since I own and use both Canon and Nikon DSLR'S, I find the Canon's ergonomics far better than Nikon's, but the Nikon's are great cameras none the less, just harder to learn and operate.

Who started the shooting is irrelevant. The point was, who was president when the shooting started.
But then this whole chain is irrelevant...

You can use aftermarket teleconverter on that lens but frankly, it's not one of Canon's better lenses and a 2x teleconverter will basically take mediocre and double it. The IQ won't be that great but it will work manually. Make sure you get a good teleconverter and good luck.

Stalin made it perfectly clear to Kim the Soviet Union would supply North Korea with arms, tanks, aircraft and training but not ground forces. If Kim needed additional ground forces, they would have to come from China. Had Stalin not had a stick up his butt over the Republic of China holding a permanent seat in the UN instead of the much larger Peoples Republic of China, and had not boycotted the UN meetings, the Soviets could have vetoed UN involvement in Korea. The Soviet Union didn't go bankrupt until 1991.

Did I miss something as usual? Wasn't the whole jist of the i***tic posting US presidents?!
So I will repeat myself, Lincoln was president at the time the civil war started.
He may not have started it but he was president. And anyone who has studied history and American political parties knows, in 1861 the Republican party was the more liberal of the US political parties and the roll of conservative and liberal has flip flopped between the Democrat and Republican parties several times over the years.

Korea; yes the north, supplied by the Soviets and the Peoples Republic of China, invaded the south and proceeded to take over most of South Korea. Eventually United Nations and South Korean forces drove the North Korean forces back to the Chinese boarder. Then the Chinese army got involved and drove the UN forces back to the 38th parallel. China didn't want a US influenced Korean government on its boarder so China essential began fighting the war for North Korea. When the war became unpopular in both China and the USA, both nations conceding neither side could actually win, a cease fire was negotiated and signed in 1953. The war technically never ended and a state of war technically exists between the north and south today. The UN didn't turn the role of peace keeper over to the US and ROK until 1967. The UN country with the largest military participation was the USA but there were troops and support personnel from 25 other countries involved in the UN effort on the Korean peninsula.

Didn't know liberals is a political party.
The US Civil War started in 1861 when Abraham Lincoln, a republican, was president.
Korean war was UN war

Nice woodpeckers...

Wrong again moron man, I'm only a partial i***t. The problem with the chart, other than it really had only one realistic caricature head, that being the clown representative of the current occupant of the white house, is every white head was identical and the black head was not.
As for a history lesson coming from a country that started out as a prison colony, I believe not...