D500 - Worth It the used price?

n057 wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

Those two deals, are they from the same vendor?

No, they are not.

One is BPM and the other one it is RCE.

Do you have any idea about the reputation of the vendor(s)?

They should be both reputable even if I never bought from them, so just opinion I have read.

I would tend to go with the 5000 click one, but another variable is how heavily will you use it? 2 years warranty sounds good.

Yeah, I obviously was thinking about that 2 Years warranty more than the XQD and the Batteries.

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

CaptainAmerica wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

The D500 shutter "life expectancy" is 200,000 clicks according to Nikon. It does not mean it will surely fail past that, but it tells you that with 120k clicks the previous owner(s) used up 60% of the nominal shutter lifespan.

I would also take into account what the two warranties cover: replacement, repair (parts and/or labor, shipment cost?), refund? With warranties, especially on used equipment, the devil is in the details.

I specially asked both if they cover shutter failure by mail end they answered “yes”. I hope they will homer their word in the case.

Furthermore, the overall conditions of the camera count too. For example, the 5k clicks one could have a low count because it was used mostly for video, but it could be old and either the body of some of the controls could be a bit worn out (potential reason for the "good" overall rating).

• This could be a good thing that it is used for video or doesn’t really matter?

On the other hand, the 120k click camera may have been used by an action or nature photographer with a "spray and pray" attitude, always firing at 10fps for several seconds to make sure to get that "perfect" shot (or perhaps it was simply a pro photographer taking hundreds or even thousands of shots per day). So, it could be even newer than the other and in better general conditions.

But, in which case it should be better? I would say the “older one used for video”?

The ideal situation would be that you buy both and return the "worse" one. If you use a credit card with a billing cycle longer than the return period the charge and refund amount would cancel each other. That might not be realistic, though. In Europe return policies are oftentimes more restrictive than in US.

Yes, I have a 30 days credit card and both vendor have a 14-days return policy but, honestly, I don’t like that much doing this kind of things.
I know probably many won’t agree, but I feel bad.

-- hide signature --

"What is creativity? To me, it's just a moment - a moment where we look at the ordinary, but we see the extraordinary." - Dewitt Jones.

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

I would get the lower shutter one with seemingly that little use. I would intend to keep it for a very long time, and a low shutter count would give me peace of mind that the shutter mechanism should have a lot of life in it.

It would also depend on the physical condition of the body itself though.

Brev00 wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

You first may want to equalize the prices.

That’s what I have also tried to do. Thanks for the help!

To do that, one must know the exact xqd card being offered. A name brand? How many gb of storage. For kick's sake, let's say that is 100 euros.

It is a Sony 32GB 440MB/s R and 400 MB/s W

Then, we have the batteries. Are they both Nikon? Or just one? How much charge is left? Let's say 50 euros for the extra battery.

One battery it is a standard 15 and the other one it is a 15b, both original.

Add 100 for the peace of mind of the longer warranty.

I guess that’s fair?

1245. Subtract 200 for the low shutter count. So, 1045 instead of 910. I would not worry so much about the camera needing a shutter replacement any time soon.

Honestly, shutter replacement doesn’t bother me THAT much, as long as it is covered under warranty (as they told me) since at least I know for 2 years I would be fine and if after two years, factoring in what I saved from the included XQD and the extra B battery, I will need to spend €300-ish.

I just have fear if there will be no replacement parts after 2 years. Moreover, if there will not be available even sooner and maybe the company offer me a partial/full refund needing to find a new csmera again, that will be more and more difficult. This is my main concern honestly with the 120K shutter count camera.

Especially if the photos show relatively little wear. Much better condition may compensate for the greater shutter count.

Practically, I would get the cheaper one. However, we haven't factored in the emotional value.

Honestly, this time I won’t factor in emotion. I usually love gear in pristine contusion and I take very good care of it. But given they are both used, old and maybe they can’t even be repaired in a couple of years and would need to be throw away, I try to not factor in emotion and aesthetics this time.

If the good condition 5000 click camera is actually in very nice condition, includes the box and all accessories, it will feel like a new camera to you. You will be the owner of the great majority of its eventual lifespan. That has a huge $500 benefit! Budget v heart in that situation.

-- hide signature --

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brev00

redhed17 wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

I would get the lower shutter one with seemingly that little use. I would intend to keep it for a very long time, and a low shutter count would give me peace of mind that the shutter mechanism should have a lot of life in it.

It would also depend on the physical condition of the body itself though.

Thanks for your opinion.

Yes, I generally like to keep my gears till it breaks. Conditions look “good”, as described. It a does not show major sign of wear but definitely a used camera I would say.

DSLRandFilm wrote:

My view is also that there will be nothing better in DX DSLR from Nikon till 2025 or ever.

Just out of curiosity, you picked 2025 as the 2 years of warranty would cover me until that? Or it was just a Ron’s years you wrote?

Therefore D500 and D7500 are the best there will be for us DSLR-holdouts.

I expect that ebay prices will fluctuate, and depend on how many people are switching to mirrorless. I suspect they will fluctuate between 750-1100

The used camera dealers prices will hold steady at around 1,100 for nxt two years.

Thanks for your opinion.

The used camera dealers usually get gear from pros/semi-pro. So their cameras will have higher shutter count, unless they are marked as EX-

Got it.

n057 wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

Those two deals, are they from the same vendor? Do you have any idea about the reputation of the vendor(s)? I would tend to go with the 5000 click one, but another variable is how heavily will you use it? 2 years warranty sounds good.

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

Sorry, I forgot to answer an important questionz

I can’t really tell how much I will shoot with the new D500 doing Wildlife. For reference, I can say that in 5/6 years with my D7200 I have shot ~50K, but I rarely shot in auto as the buffer was too small for my taste and writing was too long, so I was trying to limit myself or using a low FPS setting like 3 o 4 FPS.

So I will definitely shoot more with the D500 but I can say for sure how much more.

LtColDavenport wrote:

Brev00 wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

Yeah. I realized a Mirrorless D500 it won’t come any time soon, apparently.

That’s one of the reason that’s pushing me toward buying one used now rather than later.

Ti anyone that will read this, just a cold, straight question. I have found two deals both appealing. You would choose a D500:

• for €995 with just under 5.000 clicks, in only “good” conditions and 6 months warranty.
• or €910 with 120K shots, 1XQD, 2 batteries and 2 years warranty?

How much weight should I give to the shutter count? The €910 deal looks quite good honestly.

You first may want to equalize the prices.

That’s what I have also tried to do. Thanks for the help!

To do that, one must know the exact xqd card being offered. A name brand? How many gb of storage. For kick's sake, let's say that is 100 euros.

It is a Sony 32GB 440MB/s R and 400 MB/s W

Okay, the lowest storage capacity and least expensive of a major player's xqd card. Used $50--or less. Maybe you need a 64gb card or larger. I have the 32 gb card. It is perfectly fine for me, but I rarely shoot bursts.

Then, we have the batteries. Are they both Nikon? Or just one? How much charge is left? Let's say 50 euros for the extra battery.

One battery it is a standard 15 and the other one it is a 15b, both original.

Can get the 15 used for $15 on mpb, $25 on amazon. the 15b about $50 used.

Add 100 for the peace of mind of the longer warranty.

I guess that’s fair?

1245. Subtract 200 for the low shutter count. So, 1045 instead of 910. I would not worry so much about the camera needing a shutter replacement any time soon.

Honestly, shutter replacement doesn’t bother me THAT much, as long as it is covered under warranty (as they told me) since at least I know for 2 years I would be fine and if after two years, factoring in what I saved from the included XQD and the extra B battery, I will need to spend €300-ish.

I am mostly talking about the sort of price difference one will find between high and low shutter count D500's these days on the used market. So, current value.

I just have fear if there will be no replacement parts after 2 years.

I think this is greatly misplaced. Nikon was able to repair the shutter on my D90 13 years after it was released (last year). But, I was able to get the camera repaired locally for half the price. So, I put the risk at .0001 that they will not be able to repair the D500 in two years. And even lower if one includes third party shops.

Moreover, if there will not be available even sooner and maybe the company offer me a partial/full refund needing to find a new csmera again, that will be more and more difficult. This is my main concern honestly with the 120K shutter count camera.

Simce that worry is in the past . . .

Especially if the photos show relatively little wear. Much better condition may compensate for the greater shutter count.

Practically, I would get the cheaper one. However, we haven't factored in the emotional value.

Honestly, this time I won’t factor in emotion. I usually love gear in pristine contusion and I take very good care of it. But given they are both used, old and maybe they can’t even be repaired in a couple of years and would need to be throw away, I try to not factor in emotion and aesthetics this time.

Taking away emotion entirely (something I can't do), the less expensive option makes logical sense. But, when I was confronted with the same buying decision, I kept on looking when an option did not hit the sweet spot. I eventually found a low shutter count copy (less than 20K clicks) with a third party grip included for $900 selling on Fred Miranda, a site I trust. No warranty. Out of these two I would get the lower shutter count model! The value of the add-ons is less than I estimated earlier. And I can't divorce emotion from reason as you will see in the next paragraph.

My D90 actually started to fail early in its life. Around 20K clicks but well after its warranty expired. I didn't get it repaired at the time and moved on but kept it mostly for nostalgia. Plus it still worked though erratically. Now it works like new. So, even when buying new there are no guarantees.

DSLRandFilm wrote:

LtColDavenport wrote:

DSLRandFilm wrote:

My view is also that there will be nothing better in DX DSLR from Nikon till 2025 or ever.

Just out of curiosity, you picked 2025 as the 2 years of warranty would cover me until that? Or it was just a Ron’s years you wrote? [... snip ...]

sure, my ' 2025 ' view came from an opinion article, here: https://petapixel.com/2022/05/26/nikon-plans-to-basically-abandon-dslrs-by-2025/

Thanks!

I bought a Z9 a while ago, received it in August. After much consideration, going back and forth, I have listed my D500 for sale. Still a great camera in 2023:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4699207

No exaggeration, I don't see how any pre-owned D500 could be in better condition. B&H is showing an 8+ one with "moderate wear", whatever that means, for $1100.

Paddler213 wrote:

Still a great camera in 2023:

No questions about it. In February 2022 I spent $1,600 + taxes to buy a brand new one that showed up miraculously for a very short time on Nikon USA web site.

Good luck with your sale.

CaptainAmerica wrote:

Paddler213 wrote:

Still a great camera in 2023:

No questions about it. In February 2022 I spent $1,600 + taxes to buy a brand new one that showed up miraculously for a very short time on Nikon USA web site.

Good luck with your sale.

I should probably also mention that the AF-S 300mm f/4 D lens is a very nice option for a wildlife lens.  Less expensive than the 300PF, sharper across the frame, works very well with the TC14E II.  35mm equivalent is 450mm bare, 630mm w/ TC:

Paddler213 wrote:

I bought a Z9 a while ago, received it in August. After much consideration, going back and forth, I have listed my D500 for sale. Still a great camera in 2023:

Wow, the fact you are comparing it to a 6K camera almost 10 year newer and was in doubt, it seems a damn good compliment to the D500!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4699207

No exaggeration, I don't see how any pre-owned D500 could be in better condition. B&H is showing an 8+ one with "moderate wear", whatever that means, for $1100.

Yeah, Europe here, but the prices are more or less those. Around €1.000 to get one, depending on conditions, shipping, etc.. To me, it seemed a lot, considering the fact you could buy one new for around €1.600. I would have expected a greater price drop given the age and the new Z system but apparently not.

I now need to decide if the upgrade from the D7200 is it worth it or not, as the D500 it also bring a more expensive SD, need another SD reader and honestly, I would like a battery grip as I always owned one, I like the handling more. It is quite an expense.

Paddler213 wrote:

I should probably also mention that the AF-S 300mm f/4 D lens is a very nice option for a wildlife lens. Less expensive than the 300PF, sharper across the frame, works very well with the TC14E II. 35mm equivalent is 450mm bare, 630mm w/ TC:

A little bit out of topic, but I take the occasion to ask a question I am asking since forever. How does a crop body handle TC? Even just the smaller TC14 would be interesting.

I mean, sure, bulkier lens, slower AF, higher F-stops, etc... but what about IQ? It seems a topic that really divides people. Basically every video that I watch, the subsequent state the opposite basically.

On an FX camera, on a prime lens, to me, it seems worth it, from what I have gathered.

But what about on DX? Given that the camera it is already cropping the lens by 1.5x, is the additional 1.4x already too much? Are there some circumstance where it would be useful, are the images are hands down worst?

LtColDavenport wrote:

Paddler213 wrote:

I should probably also mention that the AF-S 300mm f/4 D lens is a very nice option for a wildlife lens. Less expensive than the 300PF, sharper across the frame, works very well with the TC14E II. 35mm equivalent is 450mm bare, 630mm w/ TC:

A little bit out of topic, but I take the occasion to ask a question I am asking since forever. How does a crop body handle TC? Even just the smaller TC14 would be interesting.

I mean, sure, bulkier lens, slower AF, higher F-stops, etc... but what about IQ? It seems a topic that really divides people. Basically every video that I watch, the subsequent state the opposite basically.

On an FX camera, on a prime lens, to me, it seems worth it, from what I have gathered.

But what about on DX? Given that the camera it is already cropping the lens by 1.5x, is the additional 1.4x already too much? Are there some circumstance where it would be useful, are the images are hands down worst?

The swan in my post above was taken with the TC14E II, so you can judge for yourself about sharpness.  DX just sees a smaller portion of the image circle, there is no decrease in IQ.

Here is the PL review, including comments about how the lens performs with TCs:

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-300mm-f4d/2

LtColDavenport wrote:

Paddler213 wrote:

I should probably also mention that the AF-S 300mm f/4 D lens is a very nice option for a wildlife lens. Less expensive than the 300PF, sharper across the frame, works very well with the TC14E II. 35mm equivalent is 450mm bare, 630mm w/ TC:

A little bit out of topic, but I take the occasion to ask a question I am asking since forever. How does a crop body handle TC? Even just the smaller TC14 would be interesting.

I mean, sure, bulkier lens, slower AF, higher F-stops, etc... but what about IQ? It seems a topic that really divides people. Basically every video that I watch, the subsequent state the opposite basically.

On an FX camera, on a prime lens, to me, it seems worth it, from what I have gathered.

But what about on DX? Given that the camera it is already cropping the lens by 1.5x, is the additional 1.4x already too much? Are there some circumstance where it would be useful, are the images are hands down worst?

I think the most effect of a tele-convertor on the image quality would be what lens is it used with, rather than the DX sensor.