What upgrades be put into a Nikon D500 Successor.

[photonut2008]

"...hopefully a lot of Nikon DX users may be tempted by an attractive upgrade if was inferred that this may be the last DX DSLR to get one big pay day, and keep DX DSLR users sated until they are eventually lured to mirrorless."

DX DSLR and DX mirrorless are mostly dead-ends as far as Nikon, Canon, and Sony are concerned. All three do next to nothing to provide any serious lenses for the smaller format, which I believe is why the D500 has largely been relegated to a niche product aimed primarily at birders.

So why do you need DX specific lenses when the FX lenses such as the 300 and 500pf and others work just fine?

You see, that's my point. Why is it that when you think of a lens for the D500 you go straight to the telephoto lenses? This is why high end DX is so niche.

DX specific lenses would typically be shorter focal lengths utilizing a smaller image circle and ideally a bit faster than their FX counterparts. Even disregarding equivalence though, the goal should be smaller and less expensive. I can buy a 24mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 for my FX camera, but I can't buy a 16mm f/2 with a smaller image circle (DX sized) for my DX camera -- same is true for a 58mm DX portrait lens (doesn't exist for Nikon, Canon, or Sony) that would come reasonably close to matching an 85mm f/1.8G that can be had for less than $500 (and again, I would take an f/1.8 and not care about matching the FX equivalent f/1.8 aperture).

Nope I use my D500 for 85-90% wildlife. That is it's purpose.

It isn't the camera itself that limits its purpose to just one or two things.

I do however use it for Macro with mt Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro G2 lens and for street photography with my Nikon 50mm f1.8G and Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 lens. All FX lenses and certainly not all telephoto and certainly not all just BIF or wildlife (though in certain urban areas once may perceive it as wildlife)! Only shoot FX lenses on my DX cameras (D500 and D300s).

Nothing wide in your arsenal. I used to use a AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8 on my D300, but replacing it right now is too expensive and it's too heavy to add to my bag for what it would give me over just using my D800. I am considering a Tokina AT-X 14-20mm F/2.0 Pro DX, the type of lens Nikon doesn't offer; I will try it out, but I'm not confident that it will be good enough.

And no, it is not the reason DX is so niche. it's limited because most serious photographers will use FX lenses on DX as FX lenses are far superior in build quality and IQ. The DX lenses are generally for people who buy a camera for shooting their kids and school plays, soccer games or their dogs running around.

That's a choice Nikon, Canon, and Sony have made, and it's detrimental to the DX/APS-C format because it encourages users to simply switch to FX/135 format. This is why discussions about Nikon's replacement for the D500 are nothing more than idle speculation -- Nikon replacing the D500 with another DSLR or a mirrorless ILC starts with Nikon having more lenses to sell to those users and not effectively encouraging them to just go for a D850 which will do practically everything a D500 can do in DX mode (with fewer fps and less viewfinder magnification, both of which will be addressed in a mirrorless version).

Like it or not, you and many of the participants in this forum need other types of photographers to adopt DX as a serious option to meet their needs, so if you want a D500 replacement than you should want good DX lenses to use on it. Just figuring that pros and well-heeled users along with budget-minded wildlife and sports photographers can support the costs to Nikon of providing a D500 doesn't add up because those users barely do that for the D850 and Nikon would only be getting a fraction of those users on-board for a D500 replacement and many have already gone for the D850 (I would if I had unlimited funds and it did 10 fps in DX mode).

I don't need anything to happen I have 2 D500s I bought used under $900 each with one around 5k shutter and the second one that's my backup with only 1700 shutter. I'm good and don't expect or care really about a D500 successor.

I also bought a used D500 and am very happy with it.

DX lenses are inferior to FX lenses in build quality and IQ except

That's not a given, it's a design choice.

maybe 2 DX lenses (12-24 and 17-55 which are very good but still not quite as good as FX) I only use FX lenses on my DX bodies. So as DX being a serious option, most serious photographers will use FX lenses. Nikon only had to make a serious Pro DX body, not invest in more DX lenses development.

It's pretty clear there won't be a D500 successor, which is what I initially wrote and caused some friction here. Ironically, nothing you've written in reply to what I initially wrote in this thread contradicts what I asserted -- you're not in the market for a replacement.

As far as anything wide, I had the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 but sold it as I just didn't use it enough. I really don't do landscape and when I do, 24mm is wide enough for me. Don't know why that mattered to you.

You but the lenses that you need. Not what other think your need. I have 3 Nikkors lenses, 200-500, 500 PF and a 50mm f1.8G and 2 Tamron lenses, 24-70mm f2.8 G2 and a 90mm f2.8 1:1 macro G2. That does everything I need.

What you do or need to do it doesn't matter to me, and vice versa. That's not the point, appealing to a niche group doesn't add up to enough of a reason for Nikon to replace the D500.

--
DPR, a sad place to waste your time

 

[Dbltfarmer]

Also, whenever the D500 is mentioned it is as a sport/wildlife camera by many, which is bo**ox of course, but that is a perception as what it is for by many.

This may come as a shock, but the D500 is seen as a sport/wildlife camera by the tens of thousands of us owners who use D500s to shoot sports or wildlife.

What I was getting at was that perception by many people takes away that you can of course take pictures of any subject, and it is a not a niche camera that is only suited to those subjects. I take landscapes, travel images, occasionally sport, and even less wildlife.

I got the D500 because I wanted the most versatile DX camera that is the best in virtually every area, but a lot if people think it is just for sport/wildlife, and if that is the wider perception, you limit sales for anyone who have no interest in sport or wildlife, but may miss out on the best AF, superior ergonomics imho amongst other things over a D7500.

I waited and passed on the D7*** cameras because they were not better than the D300S in every way. Thankfully the D500 came along when it did for me.

I think most would agree with you that the D500 is a very good all around camera. Heck I have a print hanging in a bank that was printed at 40inX72in that was taken with the D500 and a Sigma 24-105 lens. I also have a D750 but didn't have it with me the day I took the photo.

If this is the last of the DX DSLR's why make it an upgrade of the D7500 which would make it close to the D500 or upgrade the D500 to make it the best and probably last DSLR ever made?

I get the price and numbers sold but that camera will be competing with the new mirrorless cameras while the D500 successor would still have its own market that would be less competitive with the mirrorless bodies.

 

[Dbltfarmer]

Best upgrade imho would probably be the D7500 replacement to be closer to a D500, They could improve one range noticeably, which could be hard to do with a D500 replacement, and hopefully a lot of Nikon DX users may be tempted by an attractive upgrade if was inferred that this may be the last DX DSLR to get one big pay day, and keep DX DSLR users sated until they are eventually lured to mirrorless.

The only way Nikon could make a D7500 interesting to me, would be to make it a D500. There already is a D500...and I already own one.

The most money out there isn't for you or me with D500's. It is to attract the many more D3***, D5***, D7*** and anyone not already a Nikon user to a new camera. If the D500 was already doing that I think we would be seeing evidence of that, and I don't really see that. That the D500 has been the best DX camera and has not been getting those people, a replacement may not improve things, especially if a minor update at a similar or more launch price. A much improved D7*** would be an easier sell. Imho. ;-)

Time will tell who get s closer. It will probably be a D3600. Lol

Every person I know who bought one of the consumer grade 4 number cameras that upgraded either bought a D750 or a D500. They didn't go from a D3000 to 5000's or 7000's they went to the enthusiast and pro bodies.

Again those cameras won't do wha a 750 or a 500 would do. So now you have the 4 number cameras competing against the mirrorless Z50. right now the Z50 is priced about the same as a 7500 and I bet Nikon makes a mirrorless that is in a lower price range than the z50.

I have two D500's that are getting a little long in the tooth. Right now my choices are to get new shutters in both, wait and see what the upgrade is or see the 850 upgrade, or to purchase a slightly used D500. My preference is to purchase a successor to the D500 but if that doesn't happen I will try and find a couple of used D500's with low shutter counts as that would probably be less expensive than a single 880. Nikon looses one and possibly two new purchases from me. I submit that there are many others that may do he same thing as me. We have already seen that happen with the D300 and will history repeat itself?

 

[KnightPhoto2]

If one of the DSLRs is a DX camera I would think it would be a mild rehash of the D7500, maybe with much improved video features as the selling point, as that seems easiest thing to do, to try and get those after a new DX DSLR to upgrade from D3*** or D5*** cameras. Those two cameras have always been the biggest sellers, so there are numbers there ripe for upgrading.

This is just speculation but I wonder if they would go back to supporting grips and dual card-slots on all their bodies again given the lessons learned on the Z6/Z7. So if they did a D7500 upgrade add these two features back. This lack seems to be a barrier to some folk (although folks could just take the hint from Nikon and buy a D500 ;-) ).

For a D500 replacement to be significant, and attractive to a lot of current owners in some way, they would have to increase the pixels to maybe 24Mp, whilst making it better in low light. Difficult.

The weird thing about this rumour's timing is there are no whispers going around about a new DX sensor being available (other than the Z50 one that supports OSPDAF).

Increase the Fps. Difficult for a large increase, seeing how difficult it seemed to be for the D6 with a more robust shutter mechanism and more power to increase its Fps.

Go from 10 to 12fps would be a meaningful update I think.

Put in two CFExpress/XQD/SD card slots. Shouldn't be that hard given the body should be large enough.

Doubt it, there must be a market reason that some people like their SD cards (not me).

Get the AF from, or very similar to the D6. Possible, but depends on how much it costs as a component.

D500 with a D6 autofocus full feature set is enough that on its own would tip me over the edge to replacing one of my D500. But back to the sensor topic, normally I would like a new sensor with at least incremental updates from a megapixels and high ISO perspective.

Basically get their mirrorless features, including the AF, 4k video, whatever, to make a D500 replacement as good as their mirrorless cameras when the mirror is up.This would probably be unwise, as it may impinge on DX mirrorless sales.

I think this is a given, we will get this from now on whenever they do a DSLR update. Although strangely enough they did leave this off the D6, but D6 sells to a unique market.

I would like to see the side out fully adjustable rear LCD, but there are those that would want a fixed on, so it would proably stay the same. ;-) Lol

LOL

Nikon DX for quite a few years, D500 apart, has been slow evolution, and in some cases, they actually take features away from replacements. So it would be out of character to to revolutionise, unless they truly thought either DX or FX DSLRs were their last of either, and then it is a possibility they could go out with a bang. But then make either too good, and you could harm potential mirrorless sales. It is a tricky path they have to tread.

I think the whole gist of this rumour means that Nikon will NOT hold back on their DSLR features. I think it's the right path, produce the best DSLR and Z-cameras that they can and let the customer choose. This would make Nikon unique in the market as their main competitors are going one way or the other: DSLR-only (Pentax) or mirrorless-only (Sony, Canon seems to be ejecting DSLR at a fast rate). Personally I'll plan to own both DSLR and mirrorless in a mixed kit and use each of them to their strengths (gimme gimme D6 autofocus ).

What do I know though, as much as anyone else. ;-) Lol If a D500 replacement appears, I hope it is enough to get me saving my pennies, as it would have to be something amazing for me to even consider it. The D300S did everything I wanted to at one point too though, until that was left behind in a few areas, mainly pixels, dynamic range, and low light performance. Not sure those areas have improved much since the D500 was released. :-/

It is going to be interesting to see what they come out with, because I don't think there is much positivity for Nikon in the camera market at the moment.

Nikon would be smart I think to offer the best of the best in both DSLR and mirrorless - this may make them unique in the market. I do think Nikon will solve the AF issues that give the perception they are a little behind on mirrorless AF - once they do that they will be in the position of Best DSLRs and still great F-mount lenses, Best Mirrorless, Best lenses (Z-mount).

 

[KnightPhoto2]

"...hopefully a lot of Nikon DX users may be tempted by an attractive upgrade if was inferred that this may be the last DX DSLR to get one big pay day, and keep DX DSLR users sated until they are eventually lured to mirrorless."

DX DSLR and DX mirrorless are mostly dead-ends as far as Nikon, Canon, and Sony are concerned. All three do next to nothing to provide any serious lenses for the smaller format, which I believe is why the D500 has largely been relegated to a niche product aimed primarily at birders.

So why do you need DX specific lenses when the FX lenses such as the 300 and 500pf and others work just fine?

You see, that's my point. Why is it that when you think of a lens for the D500 you go straight to the telephoto lenses? This is why high end DX is so niche.

DX specific lenses would typically be shorter focal lengths utilizing a smaller image circle and ideally a bit faster than their FX counterparts. Even disregarding equivalence though, the goal should be smaller and less expensive. I can buy a 24mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 for my FX camera, but I can't buy a 16mm f/2 with a smaller image circle (DX sized) for my DX camera -- same is true for a 58mm DX portrait lens (doesn't exist for Nikon, Canon, or Sony) that would come reasonably close to matching an 85mm f/1.8G that can be had for less than $500 (and again, I would take an f/1.8 and not care about matching the FX equivalent f/1.8 aperture).

Nope I use my D500 for 85-90% wildlife. That is it's purpose.

It isn't the camera itself that limits its purpose to just one or two things.

I do however use it for Macro with mt Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro G2 lens and for street photography with my Nikon 50mm f1.8G and Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 lens. All FX lenses and certainly not all telephoto and certainly not all just BIF or wildlife (though in certain urban areas once may perceive it as wildlife)! Only shoot FX lenses on my DX cameras (D500 and D300s).

Nothing wide in your arsenal. I used to use a AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8 on my D300, but replacing it right now is too expensive and it's too heavy to add to my bag for what it would give me over just using my D800. I am considering a Tokina AT-X 14-20mm F/2.0 Pro DX, the type of lens Nikon doesn't offer; I will try it out, but I'm not confident that it will be good enough.

And no, it is not the reason DX is so niche. it's limited because most serious photographers will use FX lenses on DX as FX lenses are far superior in build quality and IQ. The DX lenses are generally for people who buy a camera for shooting their kids and school plays, soccer games or their dogs running around.

That's a choice Nikon, Canon, and Sony have made, and it's detrimental to the DX/APS-C format because it encourages users to simply switch to FX/135 format. This is why discussions about Nikon's replacement for the D500 are nothing more than idle speculation -- Nikon replacing the D500 with another DSLR or a mirrorless ILC starts with Nikon having more lenses to sell to those users and not effectively encouraging them to just go for a D850 which will do practically everything a D500 can do in DX mode (with fewer fps and less viewfinder magnification, both of which will be addressed in a mirrorless version).

Like it or not, you and many of the participants in this forum need other types of photographers to adopt DX as a serious option to meet their needs, so if you want a D500 replacement than you should want good DX lenses to use on it. Just figuring that pros and well-heeled users along with budget-minded wildlife and sports photographers can support the costs to Nikon of providing a D500 doesn't add up because those users barely do that for the D850 and Nikon would only be getting a fraction of those users on-board for a D500 replacement and many have already gone for the D850 (I would if I had unlimited funds and it did 10 fps in DX mode).

BTW I have the Tokina AT-X 14-20mm F/2.0 Pro DX and it is a great lens. I was using it for theatre where a D500 was mounted on a tripod with WR-R10/A10 to shoot remotely every time I pressed the shutter on my handheld camera on which I shot a 70-200 for my bread and butter tighter theatre shots. Typically these were during dress rehearsals to which I had exclusive access. I used it extensively at f/2-f/2.8. My impression is it's sharp corner to corner from wide-open.

It's an expensive and limited zoom range lens but it is unique in the market and if you need it you need it. I get the feeling it might even be discontinued. I'm actually going to sell mine as I've left the genre, for now anyways.

Here it is at 14mm and f2.2, ISO 2500, 1/250 second:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Madagascar/Madagascar-2017-05-29/i-tcLf2Qb/0/0e8b2983/O/2017-05-29%2019-22-16A.jpg

 

[KnightPhoto2]

Also, whenever the D500 is mentioned it is as a sport/wildlife camera by many, which is bo**ox of course, but that is a perception as what it is for by many.

This may come as a shock, but the D500 is seen as a sport/wildlife camera by the tens of thousands of us owners who use D500s to shoot sports or wildlife.

What I was getting at was that perception by many people takes away that you can of course take pictures of any subject, and it is a not a niche camera that is only suited to those subjects. I take landscapes, travel images, occasionally sport, and even less wildlife.

I got the D500 because I wanted the most versatile DX camera that is the best in virtually every area, but a lot if people think it is just for sport/wildlife, and if that is the wider perception, you limit sales for anyone who have no interest in sport or wildlife, but may miss out on the best AF, superior ergonomics imho amongst other things over a D7500.

I waited and passed on the D7*** cameras because they were not better than the D300S in every way. Thankfully the D500 came along when it did for me.

I think most would agree with you that the D500 is a very good all around camera. Heck I have a print hanging in a bank that was printed at 40inX72in that was taken with the D500 and a Sigma 24-105 lens. I also have a D750 but didn't have it with me the day I took the photo.

If this is the last of the DX DSLR's why make it an upgrade of the D7500 which would make it close to the D500 or upgrade the D500 to make it the best and probably last DSLR ever made?

I get the price and numbers sold but that camera will be competing with the new mirrorless cameras while the D500 successor would still have its own market that would be less competitive with the mirrorless bodies.

It's a no-brainer to update the D850. To be honest I'm not as sure about the D500, it sold about 200,000 bodies from what I can tell from the recent Nikon Rumors thread, but every iteration goes downwards these days for all manufacturers. I would LOVE a D580 but do you think Nikon will do it if the 5-year selling projection is 100,000 bodies?

If Canon fails to update the 7D mark II then indeed the D580 would stand unique in the market, so maybe that would even draw in some shooters from other platforms over a 5-year lifespan. I hope so... I would love to see Nikon go out with a bang on the enthusiast/pro DSLR side of things with a D6/D880/D580/D780.

Full disclosure I'd also be very interested in a Z90 (or a Z8 that ticks all the "DX boxes" that a D850 doesn't - i.e. FPS and magnified view when shooting in DX-mode) and that has great mammal and bird's-eye-focus modes.

 

[KnightPhoto2]

Here is a link to the photo. BTW I see this was ISO 2500 but exposure compensation was +2 so this equivalent to ISO 10,000 is not too bad for a D500:




D500 Tokina 14-20 @ f/2.2 1/250 ISO 2500 with + 2 exposure compensation due to bright background in this shoot



(having some trouble posting links to photos, hopefully I got it right this time ;-) )

--
Best Regards,
SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

 

[EricK214]

Here is a link to the photo. BTW I see this was ISO 2500 but exposure compensation was +2 so this equivalent to ISO 10,000 is not too bad for a D500:


D500 Tokina 14-20 @ f/2.2 1/250 ISO 2500 with + 2 exposure compensation due to bright background in this shoot

(having some trouble posting links to photos, hopefully I got it right this time ;-) )

--
Best Regards,
SteveK
'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

Huh? It's ISO 2500. You don't add +2 ec to the ISO out of camera, the ISO gets bumped in camera so that is ISO 2500 not equivalent to 10k

--
Eric

Eric Klees

Explore Eric Klees’s 620 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[photonut2008]

BTW I see this was ISO 2500 but exposure compensation was +2 so this equivalent to ISO 10,000 is not too bad for a D500:

Huh? It's ISO 2500.

It's ISO 2500 underexposed by two stops.

You don't add +2 ec to the ISO out of camera, the ISO gets bumped in camera so that is ISO 2500 not equivalent to 10k

The same thing happens in reverse when we ETTR. You can expose a shot taken with an ISO setting of 100 on the camera and pull it back a stop during the Raw conversion and you have an ISO 50 "equivalent."

 

[KnightPhoto2]

Yep I accidentally got it backwards ;-)

I usually set exposure compensation in the negatives for Theatre but this was unusual backlit lighting so had to go the other way, very atypical.

Anyhow the Tokina 14-20 is a very good lens!

 

[SNRatio]

• on-sensor pdaf for video and everything else (maybe a final focus adjustment when using the OVF).

Just a stray thought: What if they use a pellicle-type mirror with 5-10% transmission, which could be used for AF fine tuning and conventional AF calibration? That could be a life-prolonger for OVF at a reasonable price.

• Better speed on the built-in WiFi, making it useful for tethering Raw as well as JPG.

Essential for many 'new' uses of the camera

• IBIS. What the hell, why not? Making my primes suddenly VR

It was left out from the D780. Much for market segmentation reasons, I guess. Very important upgrade reason on a D500 successor

• Better snapbridge interface allowing a) multiple bodies to sync at the same time and b) configurable social media / ftp push from the phone. With better keywords, as above.

Essential for many video applications, plus 'social media workflows'

• In-body 10-bit ProRes 4:2:2 video recording at decent bit rates. Not too worried about frame rates. For most things, I could dump the external recorder!

If they could add options for high frame rates too, if would get even more useful

• Good-enough in-body sound recording / preamps with an XLR adapter. I could dump the Zoom recorder for some things!

As experience with the D780 shows, in-body mic and AF-S lenses often don't make a good combination. Something should be done about that

• A true pancake 35mm and 20mm DX lens, doesn't have to be fast. Portability!
• A selection of video-ready primes.

We could have, say 16-20-24-35mm/2.8 small lenses (not necessarily full pancakes) with good close focus abilities. If well done, they could be slow but steady sellers

 

[stevef1961]

I’d wish a successor to the 500 to have more resolution but can’’t see how that’d happen on a dx sensor, without adversely affecting noise.

Perhaps BSI similar to the 850 and Z6/7 that would allow a bump to 24 or at least reduce noise at higher iso’s on the current 20.9 mpix.

Other than that it I can’t imagine it wanting for anything - maybe IBIS!

 

[David Lal]

Other than that it I can’t imagine it wanting for anything - maybe IBIS!

I had an Ibis on my first digital camera, an Olympus point and shoot, decades ago.

 

[photonut2008]

I’d wish a successor to the 500 to have more resolution but can’’t see how that’d happen on a dx sensor, without adversely affecting noise.

Noise is mostly a function of sensor area and the reduced S/N from smaller photosites is addressed by effective binning which is another part of the noise equation (display size).

More MP can deliver more resolution with optimum shooting conditions (including disciplined technique and adequate exposure) and be a wash as ISO is raised, but it will be costly (both literally and figuratively) to maintain adequate bandwidth to support 10 fps and the AF system would have a smaller margin of error. It comes down to optimizing the resources for the intended uses of the camera.

--
DPR, a sad place to waste your time

 

[n057]

Other than that it I can’t imagine it wanting for anything - maybe IBIS!

I had an Ibis on my first digital camera, an Olympus point and shoot, decades ago.

You shall be pun-ished ...


JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 

[David Lal]

You shall be pun-ished ...

Bonjour Jean-Claude, how are you doing?

 

[dtc25]

I can’t think of much I would change. I love the D500. A while back I decided to go mirrorless, and I bought a Z50 and a Z6, and sold my D500 to fund the purchase. I like the Z cameras a lot; the Z6 is now my general purpose camera, and the Z50 is the heart of a great travel set. However, I regretted selling the D500 almost immediately. Neither of the Z cameras touches it for wildlife photography. I’ve finally bitten the bullet and ordered a new D500. I’ve lost money but I’ve only got myself to blame. I’m really excited about getting the D500 back in my hands.

 

[stevef1961]

I can’t think of much I would change. I love the D500. A while back I decided to go mirrorless, and I bought a Z50 and a Z6, and sold my D500 to fund the purchase. I like the Z cameras a lot; the Z6 is now my general purpose camera, and the Z50 is the heart of a great travel set. However, I regretted selling the D500 almost immediately. Neither of the Z cameras touches it for wildlife photography. I’ve finally bitten the bullet and ordered a new D500. I’ve lost money but I’ve only got myself to blame. I’m really excited about getting the D500 back in my hands.

You only live once! I’d buy a new one tomorrow if mine was suddenly gone.

 

[WildlifePhotog]

I can’t think of much I would change. I love the D500. A while back I decided to go mirrorless, and I bought a Z50 and a Z6, and sold my D500 to fund the purchase. I like the Z cameras a lot; the Z6 is now my general purpose camera, and the Z50 is the heart of a great travel set. However, I regretted selling the D500 almost immediately. Neither of the Z cameras touches it for wildlife photography. I’ve finally bitten the bullet and ordered a new D500. I’ve lost money but I’ve only got myself to blame. I’m really excited about getting the D500 back in my hands.

I too made the mistake of selling my D500, however I’m so stupid I made the mistake twice. Yes I’m on my third D500 with grip, and I use EN-EL18c batteries in it. I twice sold my D500 backup, thinking I would prefer another flagship body instead. So I bought a D4 the first time around for cheap, $1100 with 100K perfect condition. This was a backup mind you, my main cameras at the time were a D4s and D5. Eventually I realized I messed up and missed the D500, so I sold the D4 for a profit and bought a low mileage D500 with Nikon grip for less money than I sold the D4 for. So that was lucky, but I eventually upgraded my D4s to a second D5 as it wasn’t completely second nature to switch between the two. Sure you can setup a D4s to be close custom function and button layout wise, but it was still sort of annoying going from one to the other. I had already upgraded all of my lenses to the newer E-type variants and that cost me a lot of money. So I needed to sell the D500 this time around to afford the second D5 body. Then I thought for awhile that I would just shoot with two D5 bodies and would be fine as I had a TC-14E III and 500FL, 70-200FL, 24-70 VR. However I did not like adding the TC as much as I remember having the D500 for when I needed that extra focal length equivalence.

I’m a believer like many of you that it’s better to switch to DX cameras than add a TC, even one as good as the TC-14E III. So I decided that was it, I was going to once again but a D500 with grip lol. So just about a month or so ago I did just that and I got very lucky. I found a Nikon USA refurbished D500 with MB-D17! Just what I wanted and for a great price, I got so lucky the camera came with only 6K shutter count. Which isn’t the lowest number ever but for a refurb in 2020 I was expecting more than that, and I got both for $1199! That was a good deal I feel because it’s a genuine MB-D17 grip and the camera and grip are both like brand new, with warranty! Long story short I definitely have learned my lesson on getting rid of my D500 and the hard way haha. Luckily not so bad financially, I probably only lost a couple hundred between the three trades.



If Nikon does update the D500, it’s going to have to have 12fps and D6 AF system to interest me, I don’t care about anything else and I’d prefer Nikon to use the sensor from the Z50 and at least one Exspeed 6 processor! Also it would be nice if Nikon kept the same battery grip as the new D6 battery works in it already, that what I use the EN-EL18c. I seriously doubt Nikon will update the D500 however and sure I’d love to be wrong, but I don’t see it happening. If they were they’d have introduced it with the D6 or they would have announced it by now or leaked rumors. They did do a great job of keeping the D500 a secret and shocked us all with the D5/D500 announcement. I think we’re going to see a D880 or whatever they call the D850 replacement, but I’m afraid the other DSLR coming is a consumer or prosumer camera. Maybe the last D5000 series ever or maybe even D7800 or something. They might make a D7800 with upgraded specs and Z50 sensor with great live view video, kind of a D780 but DX version. That’s my prediction at least and again I hope to God I’m wrong, because I’d love to see a D500 replacement! I will buy one if it has the specs I talked of above.

 

[David Lal]

I too made the mistake of selling my D500, however I’m so stupid I made the mistake twice.

.. but I rather think not Patrick!