tobicy68: The micro focus adjustment on the Nikon is so simple to use why can't Canon make it simpler without the use of charts and stuff and having to do it over and over to get it right. Good job Nikon!
It's odd, because I'm pretty sure Canon patented a system that compared CDAF and PDAF results to calculate fine-tune values, but nothing has yet appeared on their cameras.
sunjester: Got to say I am really liking the number of reviews lately. Well done!
Still mulling over the move from d7200 to d500 it seems perfect for fixing the minor issues with small bird photography with the d7200.
Try renting one for a weekend - I think you'll find it an easy decision once you've tried it.
jimboyvr: Why the crop 2.2x in vid3o?
You get a 2.25x crops, which is smaller than a Four Thirds sensor. The difference being that the Micro Four Thirds system has a range of lenses designed to offer a wide field of view on such a small crop, whereas the F mount doesn't.
My guess would be that using the native 3840 x 2160 region of the sensor, then demosaicing it is less processor-heavy than reading the full width of the sensor, demosaicing then downscaling (though there's always the possibility that the sensor can't read the full area at 30 fps).
This approach makes more sense on the D5, since its 1.5x crop takes it down to match the 'Super 35' format commonly used for video. Applying a 1.5x crop to a 1.5x crop sensor, though...
martindpr: Great file for such a high ISO. Nice lens as well, a bit on the slowish side for nightscapes (I'd use 24mm f/1.4), but it is sharp and handles coma well. Wait, this ain't a FF camera? Huh?? Great pic overall and an awesome one for an APS-C! Try it with the fastest thing available: Samyang 16... Btw, did it focus right away or you were using MF?
This was by moonlight, so I was using magnified live view to manual focus on the stars.
Satyaa: The reviewers are clearly impressed! Even when the negatives are mentioned, it doesn't sound anything like a complaint :)
The one negative point (in my opinion) that was not mentioned (or I did not notice) is two different card formats.
Given the build quality, processor + AF from top-of-the-line D5, and insane buffer, why is this categorized as 'semi-professional'?
By its design and capabilities, it should be categorized as professional, whatever its sensor size. And many 'semi-professionals' have complained about the difficulty of using banks as opposed to U1/U2/U3. That doesn't seem to bother the pros.
I am sure that this will become at least the second camera of all the sports/wildlife shooters, if not the primary for many. It does have significant size/weight/price advantage over D500, plus the ability under flickering lights.
A very good review.Thanks.
Our use of the 'semi-pro' label pre-dates the D300, which was one of the cameras being reviewed when I first started at DPR. I think the logic is that the D5 will essentially only be used by professionals, whereas the comparatively low price tag of the D500 means it'll be used by a much broader range of photographers. Semi/pro perhaps.
I seldom use both card slots (and mislaid my fast SD card while writing the review, so was mainly using just an XQD card). I also figured that the mixture of card types would be apparent to anyone considering the camera so didn't need to be pointed out - if it affects you, you'll know the degree to which it affects you.
F8and30years: @Richard Butler:Could you see whole frame in the VF with your glasses?
The very extreme corners are slightly vignetted but the eye point is deep enough that I don't have to reposition the camera or look around the frame too much.
The Silver Nemesis: DPR in its splendor. When it was released:
- 7D II WAS the best APS-C camera (DSLR) on the market - got a Silver Award- D500 IS the best APS-C camera (DSLR) on the market - got a Gold Award.
Q.E.D.: I was easily right, again, in predicting this. This is why I am not trusting you since then.
I'm not sure we'd agree that the 7D II was the best APS-C ILC on the market. While it was good in some respects there were competitors with better dynamic range and cameras with much better video at the time.
The D500 is never less than competitive in almost every respect (IQ, video, ergonomics) and its AF is remarkable.
Your simplification of the situation is overly simplistic.
zakaria: I suggest you dpr to return to the old system score which is Highly recommended Average The new trend is misleading.
Which trend are you referring to?
Chaitanya S: Another Beta product from Nikon, shame on them for releasing such half baked products to market. A friend of mine has been facing the memory issue since he bought the camera and now he switched to sandisk/samsung cards due to headache he had with Lexar cards.
There appear to be a couple of odd loose ends, but to suggest the D500 is in any way 'half baked' tips over into hyperbole.
Yes, you can crash the camera if you perform a particular '[special move](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/special_move)' but it's not something many people will spontaneously encounter.
Equally it's not clear whether the problem with Lexar cards comes from Nikon or Lexar. There's a comment [further down this page](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d500?comment=4564671046) suggesting problems with Lexar cards and a Panasonic camera, so it might not be a D500-specific problem.
tecnoworld: HAHA, 91%. NX1 came 2 years ago, with faster burst, 40% more MP, BSI sensor, much better video and scored 87%.
Oh, yes, it was just a Samsung.
The NX1 scored very highly (87% is a very good score). We were really impressed with it and gave it a Gold award. It's one of the highest-scoring cameras *in its class*.
It out-scored the similarly capable Sony a6300 - a brand we're supposedly biased towards. So let's not get into any 'because it's this brand' nonsense.
However, good though the NX1's AF system is, it isn't as consistent and impressive as the D500s, I'm also pretty sure it can't keep shooting Raw files for 20 seconds.
Max Iso: Haha 450 posts in less than an hour !!!!!!
The review is built-out from the original first impressions review published just over a week ago. The comments have accumulated over that period.
helltormentor: @Richard ButlerWhat's happened to the shutter shock test section?
It's a long and time-consuming test, so we tend only to conduct it in full on high-res cameras (where you've presumably paid for lots of detail) or cameras where it's visibly a problem in our test scene.
The D500 has an electronic first curtain mode for resolution-critical work, which eliminates the risk of shutter shock. We also don't think many people will be buying a 20.7MP sports camera to achieve the finest-possible resolution.
Satyaa: DPR: I checked all the 10 pages of comments and did not see this question, and I am curious.
I know that K-1 review is in the works. You also stated in its preview that its DR challenges MF cameras.
I see similar comments in this review as well.
Given that these two cameras use very similar sensors of high capabilty, what's your opinion on their performance against each other?
Do you have any findings from your results that would indicate each of these sensors having any advantage over the other?
The D810's ISO 64 option means it offers an edge over the K-1 in single shot mode. If the thing you're shooting stays still long enough to use the multi-shot 'Pixel Resolution' mode, then the K-1 will have the advantage.
wh13: post a NSFW besides Emma Gruner's link
i was lucky no one in my office looked at my screen when i clicked it... now i need to see if i get flagged by corporate IT
I see your point. I've added a note so that people are aware.
treakj: So, when I click "see all reviews", the D500 already says "Gold Award" 90%. Have you guys already made up your mind?
No. I've started entering some values into the scoring system and a system glitch is publishing the incomplete score.
Dan DeLion: Will it take two years to get a full DPR review? We had to wait two years for the D810 review. Probably because it put all the other brands to shame. But after two years some of the other brands don’t look quite so bad compared to the Nikon product. The delayed reviews are like a safe-space. – Nobody’s feelings get hurt.
The D810 review took longer than planned for a number of reasons ([summarised here by Barney](http://www.dpreview.com/news/7058035710/)), but hurt feelings weren't among them.
I'm working on the D500 review now. It should be published within the near future.
22codfish: The Pentax K-S2 is now listed as $499.00At that price, it will offer more and out-perform all the other brands; but that camera is not necessary to be included because the K-50 is still listed for sale.
The Pentax K-50 is listed as $306.00, not discontinued, pending the official announcement of the Pentax K-70, which will replace the Pentax K-50.
There should be a Pentax camera in this group.
All of these roundups are based on list price (MSRP), not street price.
So the [K-S2 is in the $500-800 roundup](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-interchangeable-lens-cameras-500-800/12).
Our understanding is that the K-50 is discontinued.
D135ima: Where is the Pentax K-50 ?
But the list price was a little higher than that, so it appears [in the $500-800 roundup](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2016-roundup-interchangeable-lens-cameras-500-800/12).
agentlossing: Why no GM1/GM5 on this list?? Seems like a miss.
Argh, it seems I've been looking at an unfinished, unpublished page that seemed to suggest the GM5 was in the $500-$800 roundup (which it isn't).
Time for a coffee, I think.