Who would buy a Nikon Z (DX) a la D500?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
OP 2nd Wind Contributing Member • Posts: 838
Re: Who would buy a Nikon Z (DX) a la D500?

Doug Haag wrote:

2nd Wind wrote:

My first wildlife camera was the D300s a year after it's release. Perhaps my favorite wildlife body in many ways over my subsequent D500. Perhaps it was more like: "you always remember your first."

The fast growing Z lens lineup has already matured into a very impressive tele lineup. I still have my D500 but I could at this time easily go for a mirrorless Nikon DX @ 30MP but would settle for a modern 25MP stacked sensor too.

You mention the array of matching lenses and I have belatedly come to appreciate good glass a lot more than I used to. So that gives me something to think about that I hadn't considered.

But if the question is whether the characteristics of a mirrorless body provide some compelling advantage that, given what I shoot and the way I shoot, is likely to significantly improve my images versus shooting them with a DSLR, the answer is probably no. For anything I might shoot from a tripod such as macro or landscapes, my D500 in live view already provides a significant number of mirrorless characteristics (such as histogram preview, on-sensor focusing, etc.)

I'll admit that a smaller, lighter camera might become necessary some day. But fortunately, my D500 is still not too big or heavy for me, even though I am approaching 80 this fall. I still love this camera and don't feel any urgency to "move on".

Good to know geezers like you (opps us) can handle a D500 though I'm only a few years behind you

I've lugged heavy glass for a long time as I have Nikon 300mm f 2.8, 400mm 2f.8 & 500mm f4 among other heavyweights but I take some these on long solo backcountry canoeing trips & backpacking trips from the wilderness waterways of BWCA to glacial lakes to Everglades. For me it's never been about the body but the lenses (weight & size).

Once in my canoe with lenses inside my pelican case theres no issues with weight, however, even a quarter mile portage over a little used overgrown portage trail makes every ounce of weight feel like a pound! Backpacking? Forget the tele primes and usually only one body and 70-200mm 2.8 & TC1.4. Even then its more weight than most of my food! Yes, considerations change in situations like these.

For a lightweight kit, few months ago I bought an Olympus M1X along with a Panasonic Leica 200mm f2.8 IS (400mm 35mm equiv), Olympus 100-400 f5-6.3 IS (200mm-800mm 35mm equiv and at 2 1/4 lbs incredible reach of 800mm!) and an Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 IS (80-300mm 35mm equiv) . I also got a TC 1.4 which works extremely well on all the lenses. All three of those lenses including my EM1X weigh less than either my Nikon 400 or 500. The size advantage of the M43 lenses is incredible. Optically and build is top notch pro quality. Cost? half to a third vs Nikon F mounts.

Overall I was very impressed with the M43 lens and the M1X pro body. Yes, I know Nikons PF tele's are very good and lighter than F mount but the Z lens lineup is really looking great. For most of us it's about what we shoot but for a few of us it's where and how we shoot. That changes the dynamics considerably. If all I did was walk a park boardwalk or nature trail a lightweight kit, although nice would not be necessary.

I still use my D500 & D800 (landscapes). As a general walk around wildlife zoom I use my 200-500 & D500 but when I compare the size & weight of this kit to the Oly 100-400 the difference in size & weight is incredible. Not to mention 8 stops IBIS to tame those shots @800mm+.

All that said I still would like to stay in the Nikon ecosystem but this time with the Z system, that is if a Z 500 is released. If not then I'll keep my M43 kit for a lightweight backcountry kit, keep my Nikon bodies but thin out my heavy Nikon primes.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow