D500 - Worth It the used price?

carylee2002 wrote:

The one thing that was the forefront of using the D500 vs other camera is the huge buffer when using then the XQD card and the ability to shoot in extremely high iso's in low light. Now you can use CF cards after the firmware upgrade, But you team that camera up with the 200-500 zoom and that is a great combo for wildlife. You should also get a quality monopod/tripod because of the weight. There are many videos and forums on this setup. I also own the 7100 before the 7200 came out and they still are not even close to the D500. The only other camera that is sold dlsr was the D800 before the Z series camera out.

That was kind of my main intention.

I would like to buy the 200-500mm f5.6, for the time being paring it with my D7200, but I was thinking to upgrade the body as well.

I don't feel the D7200 was built with that purpose. It can shoot at 6 FPS with a 18-ish buffer size, it is a merely 3s burst and it take way more to unload (yes, I have good quality SD). And while still AF it is fine and never had issues, the moving targets gets it in trouble I saw. All of these without speaking about high ISO, after 3200 it starts to become really noise, after 6400 heavy color noise start to appear, beyond this, it is almost unusable for me.

....... how could anybody get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror, knowing they haven't a D500 and still feel good about themselves .... ??

It's just not possible !!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/

That is the reason why most of us here made the move way back in 2016

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

davethebirder wrote:

....... how could anybody get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror, knowing they haven't a D500 and still feel good about themselves .... ??

It's just not possible !!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/

I've been Full Frame for years with a D7200 as a long reach item for my bigger telephotos.

I got a D5 to do my bands in bars stuff and I can use a 2.8 zoom vs a bag o primes vs the  D850.

I am hoping to get a pleasant ISO surprise from the D500 I just ordered from Adorama for $920.

Lenses I am looking to use it with are the 600f4 AFS II, 200-500, 600 f5.6 AIS, 800 5.6 AIS and 2x teleconverters.   Also the 80-200 2.8D when I have to fight my way out of someplace!!

RealVSK wrote:

I am hoping to get a pleasant ISO surprise from the D500 I just ordered from Adorama for $920.

See:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=nikon_d7200&attr13_1=nikon_d500&attr13_2=nikon_d850&attr13_3=nikon_d7500&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.0012958963282937365&y=0.030444167898334852

RealVSK wrote:

I am hoping to get a pleasant ISO surprise from the D500 I just ordered from Adorama for $920

I think you will. This was taken with the 16-80mm lens at 62mm, 1/100, f/4 and all the way up to ISO 11400 (I had the D500 in Auto ISO)

It is grainy, yes, but I'd dare say almost film-like. JPEG straight out of camera, no post at all. Not bad for a DX-size sensor.

If something were to happen to my D500, I would get another one to replace it. I'm not sure I would get a used one with more than 50k on the shutter, as I would plan to have it a very long time. And I would pay whatever the going rate was at the time. Fingers crossed I never have to go down that route.

APS-C has always been my format of choice, even though I am old enough to have used film. It is the best compromise for size, weight, cost and quality, imho.

I was never convinced that the D7***'s were better as an overall package than my D300S, so steered clear, and kept using the D300S, until thankfully, the D500 appeared.

Some say the D850 is similar to the D500 in cropped DX mode, but it does not have the fps, or the buffer depth. The AF points are also all clustered in the central area of the viewfinder, rather than spread across the whole viewfinder of the D500. Not good for sport or wildlife in comparison. The D810, has even less resolution in cropped mode, and an inferior, though still good, AF system. The D8** cameras are larger and heavier.

I have no interest in mirrorless, or the need to change my lenses for a new mount. Yes, I could use the lenses I have with an adapter, but it increases the size and weight of the lenses, negating any size and weight saving from a mirrorless camera.

I am not blind to the improvements in AF, and fps from mirrorless tech. I have a Sony RX100M7 that doubles the fps and focus points of the D500, but I don't think any manufacturer has got close to a D500 in (cropped) mirrorless yet. And that is not just fps, AF or buffer depth, it is also build quality and ergonomics.

The D500 kept the high price pretty much throughout its time on the market for a reason, it was the best camera of its type, and no one got close. The used prices are testament that that is still being the case.

At the end of the day anyone considering a camera like this has to be clear on what they are buying it for, and if is still the obvious choice, then the price will be based on the shutter count one is willing to live with.

Of the D500 bodies you listed I would probably go from the bottom of the list to the middle one, in that order of preference.

Again, good luck with making a decision.

CaptainAmerica wrote:

RealVSK wrote:

I am hoping to get a pleasant ISO surprise from the D500 I just ordered from Adorama for $920

I think you will. This was taken with the 16-80mm lens at 62mm, 1/100, f/4 and all the way up to ISO 11400 (I had the D500 in Auto ISO)

It is grainy, yes, but I'd dare say almost film-like. JPEG straight out of camera, no post at all. Not bad for a DX-size sensor.

Cool !  I would definitely do 2.8 .

I think I'll be using the D500 outdoors at sunrise / sunset for birds and stuff.  But slap the 80-200 2.8 for outdoor events with distance.

I'll try to remember to post some.

RealVSK wrote:

I am hoping to get a pleasant ISO surprise from the D500 I just ordered from Adorama for $920.

It is pretty good at high ISO's. Image is with a Nikkor 300mm PF - SOOC jpeg scaled down to 1920x1280.

D500/Nikkor 300mm PF/ ISO 10000 - straight out of camera jpeg

redhed17 wrote:

If something were to happen to my D500, I would get another one to replace it. I'm not sure I would get a used one with more than 50k on the shutter, as I would plan to have it a very long time. And I would pay whatever the going rate was at the time. Fingers crossed I never have to go down that route.

APS-C has always been my format of choice, even though I am old enough to have used film. It is the best compromise for size, weight, cost and quality, imho.

I was never convinced that the D7***'s were better as an overall package than my D300S, so steered clear, and kept using the D300S, until thankfully, the D500 appeared.

Some say the D850 is similar to the D500 in cropped DX mode, but it does not have the fps, or the buffer depth. The AF points are also all clustered in the central area of the viewfinder, rather than spread across the whole viewfinder of the D500. Not good for sport or wildlife in comparison. The D810, has even less resolution in cropped mode, and an inferior, though still good, AF system. The D8** cameras are larger and heavier.

I have no interest in mirrorless, or the need to change my lenses for a new mount. Yes, I could use the lenses I have with an adapter, but it increases the size and weight of the lenses, negating any size and weight saving from a mirrorless camera.

I am not blind to the improvements in AF, and fps from mirrorless tech. I have a Sony RX100M7 that doubles the fps and focus points of the D500, but I don't think any manufacturer has got close to a D500 in (cropped) mirrorless yet. And that is not just fps, AF or buffer depth, it is also build quality and ergonomics.

The D500 kept the high price pretty much throughout its time on the market for a reason, it was the best camera of its type, and no one got close. The used prices are testament that that is still being the case.

At the end of the day anyone considering a camera like this has to be clear on what they are buying it for, and if is still the obvious choice, then the price will be based on the shutter count one is willing to live with.

I have two D500s and the D750 .... I bought grey market and suffered a rear screen failure on the first and coughed up for a UK repair (£250) ....... during it's absence I realized that one just wasn't enough, so I ordered a second grey market which has been faultless ......

........ so, even though looking in the mirror is not a pleasant sight ..... I'm more than compensated by my two D500s ..........

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/50477969187/in/datetaken-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/124690178@N08/with/50542699003/

The larger overall consideration is, which lens(es) do you want to use with your wildlife camera system?

In late 2015 when the F-mount 200-500mm zoom was released, I was among the first to place an order. It was an excellent consumer zoom for wildlife and bird enthusiasts. The D500 was introduced a few months later and was the perfect body to pair with the 200-500. I eventually made the move to the D500 in 2018 and haven't looked back.

Fast forward to today...none of the F-mount lenses in your signature is a pure wildlife lens. So, which lens are you eyeing as your first choice for wildlife? If you're looking at Z-mount bodies, there are several good available options. The best option, however, can arguably be described as vaporware: the Z-mount 200-600mm zoom lens. If you're looking at F-mount lenses, the 200-500 is still among the better options. There's also the 500mm f/5.6 PF and several third-party F-mount zooms. The issue with these is that you would need to use them with an FTZ adapter on a Z-mount body.

Any Nikon aficionado who wants to do wildlife photography but doesn't have an appropriate lens for that genre is in something of a bind. The available APS-C Z-mount bodies are entry-level kit not really tailored to that genre. Setting aside the $5,500 Z9, the Z7II is probably the best option...but is also a compromise. And while there are several interesting Z-mount primes and zooms, the 200-600 that's been on the Z-mount lens roadmap for years is still just a twinkle in Nikon's eye.

A D500 or D850 paired with a 200-500 or 500 PF would be a great wildlife kit. But F-mount anything is in the process of being discontinued. Within 5 years, it will be difficult to get parts or services for anything a person would buy, today.

If you are committed to getting into the Z-cosystem eventually, my recommendation would be to purchase a Z-mount body and lens within your budget to use for wildlife and then upgrade over time. If you're not committed to Nikon as your brand, I'd recommend expanding your search criteria to include Canon, Fuji and Sony products. You may still end up buying Nikon...but you may find a better, more complete solution that's available today in another brand.

Good luck.

davethebirder wrote:

I have two D500s and the D750 .... I bought grey market and suffered a rear screen failure on the first and coughed up for a UK repair (£250) .......

I got the D500 imported not long after release, and the rear screen got damaged after my bag fell off a table. A few places I phoned did not yet have any replacement parts, and I was quoted £350+, depending on the price of the parts, if they could get them.

I didn't go go to Nikon (UK), as their policy had been that they would not touch imports in the past. I tried on the off chance they would at least have the parts available, and they said they would repair it, and quoted £173, depending on if there was any other damage apart from the rear screen. Thankfully that was all that was wrong, and that was what they charged. Bullet dodged.

I cancelled a holiday though, because they said the camera may not be back in time, and I didn't want to go away without it. As it was, it came back quicker than expected, and I could have gone away, but never mind. :-/

CaptainAmerica wrote:

I got my D500 in February 2022, directly from Nikon USA. With sales taxes it came to $1,700.

Was it worth it for a 6-yr old camera? To me yes, as I wanted to upgrade from my D90 and wanted a camera primarily for action photography. Even today, one year later, there isn't one like it.

€1,000 or $1,000 for a used one in "excellent" conditions (as rated for example by MPB) does not seem outrageous if you want or need the kind of performance the D500 gives you.

I got mine from MPB in September 2001. It had 4,723 shutter actuations. The price was $1,199. I traded my D750 and several full frame lenses to close the deal and ended up getting cash back along with the D500.

I agree that a used D500 in the condition and price range you've posted is absolutely not outrageous.

I got a low shutter count D500 with a third party grip for $900 including shipping Oct. 2020 using Fred Miranda.  Thought from your post the prices had gone up.  Checked it out. No.  One can still get decent, low shutter count models for $900 or even less.  One with 150K shots sold for $450 so prices seem to take shutter count into account.  You may not be able to access FM from where you are and prices may be much higher near you.  But, one can get a pretty good deal on one in the USA. But, whether or not you should get one is another matter.

redhed17 wrote:

If something were to happen to my D500, I would get another one to replace it. I'm not sure I would get a used one with more than 50k on the shutter, as I would plan to have it a very long time. And I would pay whatever the going rate was at the time. Fingers crossed I never have to go down that route.

APS-C has always been my format of choice, even though I am old enough to have used film. It is the best compromise for size, weight, cost and quality, imho.

I was never convinced that the D7***'s were better as an overall package than my D300S, so steered clear, and kept using the D300S, until thankfully, the D500 appeared.

Some say the D850 is similar to the D500 in cropped DX mode, but it does not have the fps, or the buffer depth. The AF points are also all clustered in the central area of the viewfinder, rather than spread across the whole viewfinder of the D500. Not good for sport or wildlife in comparison. The D810, has even less resolution in cropped mode, and an inferior, though still good, AF system. The D8** cameras are larger and heavier.

I have no interest in mirrorless, or the need to change my lenses for a new mount. Yes, I could use the lenses I have with an adapter, but it increases the size and weight of the lenses, negating any size and weight saving from a mirrorless camera.

I am not blind to the improvements in AF, and fps from mirrorless tech. I have a Sony RX100M7 that doubles the fps and focus points of the D500, but I don't think any manufacturer has got close to a D500 in (cropped) mirrorless yet. And that is not just fps, AF or buffer depth, it is also build quality and ergonomics.

The D500 kept the high price pretty much throughout its time on the market for a reason, it was the best camera of its type, and no one got close. The used prices are testament that that is still being the case.

At the end of the day anyone considering a camera like this has to be clear on what they are buying it for, and if is still the obvious choice, then the price will be based on the shutter count one is willing to live with.

Thank you for your opinion. Appreciated.

Bill Ferris wrote:

The larger overall consideration is, which lens(es) do you want to use with your wildlife camera system?

In late 2015 when the F-mount 200-500mm zoom was released, I was among the first to place an order. It was an excellent consumer zoom for wildlife and bird enthusiasts. The D500 was introduced a few months later and was the perfect body to pair with the 200-500. I eventually made the move to the D500 in 2018 and haven't looked back.

Fast forward to today...none of the F-mount lenses in your signature is a pure wildlife lens.

Correct. Because I am also planning to buy a used (if it will make sense, as it goes for the same price as new basically, at least today...) 200-500mm 5.6 Nikon.

Moreover, my father has some good old glass. I didn't listed it as it is technically not mine. But I could use:

• 300mm f2.8, I think it was the first AF version, it is a beast in size.
• 400mm f4 or something Manual Focuse, if I wanna give it a try
• 2x Teleconverter, but without AF.

So, which lens are you eyeing as your first choice for wildlife? If you're looking at Z-mount bodies, there are several good available options.

I thought several times to move into the Z system, but by the time being, it is too expensive. I am not talking purely about the camera, as a used Z6 can be bought for just over 1K, but it all the surroundings such as the FTZ adapter, one if not two CFe cards (that they are damn expensive) and don't forget the reader it self that it is damn expensive too! Plus, as another user stated, it would make absolutely no sense to move into the Z system, with out a couple of Z glasses, it would neglected the purpose. Let's say I would buy the 24-120 F4 and a 50 1.8 it add up quickly. Now we are seeing a total expense of approximately €3.000 if not more. And let's not think if I would buy longer and faster lenses...

As an hobbyist, mainly, I can't justify that, not at this moment. I mean, 1K for a D500 (or an "equivalent" camera) and 1K for a good Wildlife lens, let's say the 200-500 and I can call it a day for around €2.000, without saying, I would not be obliged to buy both together but I could divide the purchase. While if I would buy a Z6, much of the stuff it should be both all together.

The best option, however, can arguably be described as vaporware: the Z-mount 200-600mm zoom lens. If you're looking at F-mount lenses, the 200-500 is still among the better options. There's also the 500mm f/5.6 PF and several third-party F-mount zooms. The issue with these is that you would need to use them with an FTZ adapter on a Z-mount body.

Any Nikon aficionado who wants to do wildlife photography but doesn't have an appropriate lens for that genre is in something of a bind. The available APS-C Z-mount bodies are entry-level kit not really tailored to that genre. Setting aside the $5,500 Z9, the Z7II is probably the best option...but is also a compromise. And while there are several interesting Z-mount primes and zooms, the 200-600 that's been on the Z-mount lens roadmap for years is still just a twinkle in Nikon's eye.

A D500 or D850 paired with a 200-500 or 500 PF would be a great wildlife kit. But F-mount anything is in the process of being discontinued. Within 5 years, it will be difficult to get parts or services for anything a person would buy, today.

Yeah, I am starting to read it all over. This is honestly kind of threatening. That's why I am trying to spend more on glass than on cameras (and that's what I have always been doing). But when that moment will comes, it would be safe to assume that used prices would have drop even lower, don't want to say that you could buy another (used) camera for the same-ish price for repair, almost. I mean, for some cameras already it is true.

I just got my Nikon D7200 AF repaired, it was something like €190 + taxes + shipping both way on my expense, a total of a little less than €300. You can find really good copies on the used maker for €400-ish. Anything that would have required a more serious work, and I would have bought another one used. I can easily see this kind of behavior slowly creeping up in more (still) more expensive bodies in 5 years.

Going back on track, yes, I considered a D850 as it would fulfill a role that I completely miss, a Full Frame with High MP camera. I know a friend that has it and it produce really beautiful images. Unfortunately, it is way out of my price range. Around me it is sold used for €1800-ish, honestly, the price it fair, but I simply could not afford, at least not if I also want to buy a lens.

Something that I also considered that it could make sense (or not...) it is a used D4s. It is a FF camera (that I currently miss) with still grate AF (even if worst than the D500), still amazing Low Light performance (I see a comparison D4s vs D5 vs Z9 and damn, it hold up!) and a really good FPS. Moreover, it already "comes with a grip" something I love and buy for all cameras. It sells for €200-300 more in respect to a D500, but if I factor in a grip for a D500 that it is around €250 they kind of brake even.  Sure, I would miss 4MP and the reach of the APS-C body, but if I decide to buy a FF, I could keep mine D7200 by that point, while if I go for a D500 I may sell it as I realistically would not need those.

If you are committed to getting into the Z-cosystem eventually, my recommendation would be to purchase a Z-mount body and lens within your budget to use for wildlife and then upgrade over time. If you're not committed to Nikon as your brand, I'd recommend expanding your search criteria to include Canon, Fuji and Sony products. You may still end up buying Nikon...but you may find a better, more complete solution that's available today in another brand.

Yes, I am committed to Nikon as a brand. The only other it is Fujifilm, I am started to get into last year and I really like it, but for the time being, I cannot see it if not as a second body/travel kit/street/everyday camera. For anything work related (I occasionally do some work in pub and events) and "specialized" pictures like Wildlife and such, I would rely on my Nikon gear, at least by today.

In short, I am loving Fujifilm, but I plan on just keeping to for prime, fast lenses.

Good luck.

Thank you very much for your comment.

bluzman wrote:

CaptainAmerica wrote:

I got my D500 in February 2022, directly from Nikon USA. With sales taxes it came to $1,700.

Was it worth it for a 6-yr old camera? To me yes, as I wanted to upgrade from my D90 and wanted a camera primarily for action photography. Even today, one year later, there isn't one like it.

€1,000 or $1,000 for a used one in "excellent" conditions (as rated for example by MPB) does not seem outrageous if you want or need the kind of performance the D500 gives you.

I got mine from MPB in September 2001.

2001? A Nikon D500?

It had 4,723 shutter actuations. The price was $1,199. I traded my D750 and several full frame lenses to close the deal and ended up getting cash back along with the D500.

I agree that a used D500 in the condition and price range you've posted is absolutely not outrageous.

I mean, €1.1K for 5K shutter count, it would kind of being fine. but I see it with much more even if it is getting older, the prices seems to old up.

Brev00 wrote:

I got a low shutter count D500 with a third party grip for $900 including shipping Oct. 2020 using Fred Miranda. Thought from your post the prices had gone up. Checked it out. No. One can still get decent, low shutter count models for $900 or even less. One with 150K shots sold for $450 so prices seem to take shutter count into account. You may not be able to access FM from where you are and prices may be much higher near you. But, one can get a pretty good deal on one in the USA. But, whether or not you should get one is another matter.

Thanks for the considerations.