Post your US D500 launch event findings here - Part Three

[Bill Dewey]

Well, I just tried to reply to Jemini in Part Two and it is full, so let's start Part Three!

Regarding testing AF speed and accuracy, I just don't see how you can do this in any reliable fashion at a Launch Event, glad you found one to go to.

We don't have the type of subject, erratic and fast moving, nor do we have the distance and lighting. Yes, you can get a "feel", but unless you are taking another body with the same lens and you can use a stop watch, I just don't know that you can get any reliable confirmation on speed and accuracy. Also there are a whole bunch of new AF options that can affect this as well.

Given the changes in each of the last generations, this is the last thing I am concerned about.

 

[luxun54]

They seem to have added a few events in late Feb-early March to the US schedule in some states. I was on work-travel and missed the earlier events in my area, but will now get to go to one this week.

 

[jeminijoseph]

Well, I just tried to reply to Jemini in Part Two and it is full, so let's start Part Three!

Regarding testing AF speed and accuracy, I just don't see how you can do this in any reliable fashion at a Launch Event, glad you found one to go to.

We don't have the type of subject, erratic and fast moving, nor do we have the distance and lighting. Yes, you can get a "feel", but unless you are taking another body with the same lens and you can use a stop watch, I just don't know that you can get any reliable confirmation on speed and accuracy. Also there are a whole bunch of new AF options that can affect this as well.

Given the changes in each of the last generations, this is the last thing I am concerned about.

 

[Bill Dewey]

Well, I just tried to reply to Jemini in Part Two and it is full, so let's start Part Three!

Regarding testing AF speed and accuracy, I just don't see how you can do this in any reliable fashion at a Launch Event, glad you found one to go to.

We don't have the type of subject, erratic and fast moving, nor do we have the distance and lighting. Yes, you can get a "feel", but unless you are taking another body with the same lens and you can use a stop watch, I just don't know that you can get any reliable confirmation on speed and accuracy. Also there are a whole bunch of new AF options that can affect this as well.

Given the changes in each of the last generations, this is the last thing I am concerned about.

 

[Laslo Varadi]

Attended launch event in Virginia today. Camera, D500, shutter is pretty quiet. Between the D7200 and the D810. There will be new mobile software that will work camera. Android will be first and Apple a few weeks later. Launch date will be mid March for the D5 and late April for the D500.

 

[luxun54]

Attended launch event in Virginia today.

I also attended tonight's VA event, too bad we didn't know who each other was to introduce ourselves.

The Nikon technical rep (David) seemed knowledgeable, and I think his presentation may have tipped a couple of fence-sitters toward a "buy" decision on the D5. As expected, most of the information was familiar from the many previous excellent reports here. A few points worth mentioning or re-emphasizing:

- I had either not heard or hadn't focused on the redesigned mirror mechanism on the D5/D500 to allow the fast frame rate without blacking out the viewfinder for more than a fraction of a second.

- The D500 shutter did not seem any quieter than my D300, so maybe about the same.

- Viewfinder was great.

- LCD screen tilt mechanism seems remarkably robust.

- The autofocus speed of the D500 with the 16-80 was excellent as expected, but the autofocus with the 200-500VR was remarkably fast.

- On a few high-ISO test shots (10000+), I had to get to maximum enlargement on the LCD before I could discern anything that remotely looked like noise in the black areas. I had done some pre-tests on my D300 for comparison, and I would compare 10000 ISO on the D500 to ISO 800 or 1000 on my D300.

- David from Nikon confirmed that they have been reading our posts here in the forums.

- In response to a question, he emphasized that the High ISO performance on both cameras will be significantly better than any previous cameras, and confirmed that it is the interplay of the sensor, the Expeed5 processor, and the low-light autofocus ability that will produce those improved results.

- He was quick to note that the extended ISO settings are for specialized applications like forensics.

- He mentioned that the Auto fine-tune works pretty much the same as in other recent cameras.

- He confirmed that with both slots filled on the D500 and with the camera writing to both cards, the performance would be based on the slowest card.

If I remember anything else, I will add it.

 

[jeminijoseph]

Attended launch event in Virginia today.

I also attended tonight's VA event, too bad we didn't know who each other was to introduce ourselves.

The Nikon technical rep (David) seemed knowledgeable, and I think his presentation may have tipped a couple of fence-sitters toward a "buy" decision on the D5. As expected, most of the information was familiar from the many previous excellent reports here. A few points worth mentioning or re-emphasizing:

- I had either not heard or hadn't focused on the redesigned mirror mechanism on the D5/D500 to allow the fast frame rate without blacking out the viewfinder for more than a fraction of a second.

- The D500 shutter did not seem any quieter than my D300, so maybe about the same.

- Viewfinder was great.

- LCD screen tilt mechanism seems remarkably robust.

- The autofocus speed of the D500 with the 16-80 was excellent as expected, but the autofocus with the 200-500VR was remarkably fast.

Are you using 200-500 now on your D300? I'm curious when you said it's remarkably fast, do you have anything to compare to?

- On a few high-ISO test shots (10000+), I had to get to maximum enlargement on the LCD before I could discern anything that remotely looked like noise in the black areas. I had done some pre-tests on my D300 for comparison, and I would compare 10000 ISO on the D500 to ISO 800 or 1000 on my D300.

Wel... I'm not too excited about it especially after seeing the actual result from D5.

- David from Nikon confirmed that they have been reading our posts here in the forums.

Hi David

- In response to a question, he emphasized that the High ISO performance on both cameras will be significantly better than any previous cameras, and confirmed that it is the interplay of the sensor, the Expeed5 processor, and the low-light autofocus ability that will produce those improved results.

Not sure how does improved AF will help high ISO. May be he meant it will help to capture the shot that was not practical earlier

- He was quick to note that the extended ISO settings are for specialized applications like forensics.

- He mentioned that the Auto fine-tune works pretty much the same as in other recent cameras.

I didn't know this already exists

- He confirmed that with both slots filled on the D500 and with the camera writing to both cards, the performance would be based on the slowest card.

Make sense.

If I remember anything else, I will add it.

Please..

 

[luxun54]

- The autofocus speed of the D500 with the 16-80 was excellent as expected, but the autofocus with the 200-500VR was remarkably fast.

Are you using 200-500 now on your D300? I'm curious when you said it's remarkably fast, do you have anything to compare to?

I do not currently have the 200-500; I was basing my comment on the fact that it is a big lens to move and that some reviews have suggested acquiring focus on 200-500 could be slow compared to AF-S 80-400.

- In response to a question, he emphasized that the High ISO performance on both cameras will be significantly better than any previous cameras, and confirmed that it is the interplay of the sensor, the Expeed5 processor, and the low-light autofocus ability that will produce those improved results.

Not sure how does improved AF will help high ISO. May be he meant it will help to capture the shot that was not practical earlier

It was a passing comment, but I interpreted it to also mean that with a higher probability of having a "shot in the dark" in good focus, detail was likely to hold up better.

 

[iwannabesedated]

Attended launch event in Virginia today.

I also attended tonight's VA event, too bad we didn't know who each other was to introduce ourselves.

The Nikon technical rep (David) seemed knowledgeable, and I think his presentation may have tipped a couple of fence-sitters toward a "buy" decision on the D5. As expected, most of the information was familiar from the many previous excellent reports here. A few points worth mentioning or re-emphasizing:

- I had either not heard or hadn't focused on the redesigned mirror mechanism on the D5/D500 to allow the fast frame rate without blacking out the viewfinder for more than a fraction of a second.

- The D500 shutter did not seem any quieter than my D300, so maybe about the same.

- Viewfinder was great.

- LCD screen tilt mechanism seems remarkably robust.

- The autofocus speed of the D500 with the 16-80 was excellent as expected, but the autofocus with the 200-500VR was remarkably fast.

- On a few high-ISO test shots (10000+), I had to get to maximum enlargement on the LCD before I could discern anything that remotely looked like noise in the black areas. I had done some pre-tests on my D300 for comparison, and I would compare 10000 ISO on the D500 to ISO 800 or 1000 on my D300.

- David from Nikon confirmed that they have been reading our posts here in the forums.

- In response to a question, he emphasized that the High ISO performance on both cameras will be significantly better than any previous cameras, and confirmed that it is the interplay of the sensor, the Expeed5 processor, and the low-light autofocus ability that will produce those improved results.

- He was quick to note that the extended ISO settings are for specialized applications like forensics.

- He mentioned that the Auto fine-tune works pretty much the same as in other recent cameras.

- He confirmed that with both slots filled on the D500 and with the camera writing to both cards, the performance would be based on the slowest card.

If I remember anything else, I will add it.

Very, very interesting information. Thank you for sharing it here. -iwbs

 

[Another birder]

i guess one persons significant, is another's not so significant - I would consider 1/2 a stop improvement in noise to be significant, while others seem to expect better performance than full frame.

 

[luxun54]

i guess one persons significant, is another's not so significant - I would consider 1/2 a stop improvement in noise to be significant, while others seem to expect better performance than full frame.

--

While no specific claims were made compared to this or that prior camera model, what was communicated certainly left the impression that the expected ISO performance of both D5/D500 would set a new standard.

 

[luxun54]

A couple of more things I remembered from last night's session:

- The Nikon rep was emphatic that the reason for the D500 delay was NOT a quality control issue, but rather that they had wildly underestimated initial demand.

- FWIW, he told an interesting anecdote about the "D400." According to his version, the D7200 was going to be called the "D400," but NikonUSA warned Japan that it would be a marketing disaster in the US to give a D7xxx-type body a three-digit name and try to pass it off as the D300 successor.

 

[chipmaster]

A couple of more things I remembered from last night's session:

- The Nikon rep was emphatic that the reason for the D500 delay was NOT a quality control issue, but rather that they had wildly underestimated initial demand.

- FWIW, he told an interesting anecdote about the "D400." According to his version, the D7200 was going to be called the "D400," but NikonUSA warned Japan that it would be a marketing disaster in the US to give a D7xxx-type body a three-digit name and try to pass it off as the D300 successor.

 

[Bill Dewey]

A couple of more things I remembered from last night's session:

- The Nikon rep was emphatic that the reason for the D500 delay was NOT a quality control issue, but rather that they had wildly underestimated initial demand.

- FWIW, he told an interesting anecdote about the "D400." According to his version, the D7200 was going to be called the "D400," but NikonUSA warned Japan that it would be a marketing disaster in the US to give a D7xxx-type body a three-digit name and try to pass it off as the D300 successor.

 

[Bill Dewey]

i guess one persons significant, is another's not so significant - I would consider 1/2 a stop improvement in noise to be significant, while others seem to expect better performance than full frame.

--

While no specific claims were made compared to this or that prior camera model, what was communicated certainly left the impression that the expected ISO performance of both D5/D500 would set a new standard.

 

[Bill Dewey]

- The autofocus speed of the D500 with the 16-80 was excellent as expected, but the autofocus with the 200-500VR was remarkably fast.

Are you using 200-500 now on your D300? I'm curious when you said it's remarkably fast, do you have anything to compare to?

I do not currently have the 200-500; I was basing my comment on the fact that it is a big lens to move and that some reviews have suggested acquiring focus on 200-500 could be slow compared to AF-S 80-400.

- In response to a question, he emphasized that the High ISO performance on both cameras will be significantly better than any previous cameras, and confirmed that it is the interplay of the sensor, the Expeed5 processor, and the low-light autofocus ability that will produce those improved results.

Not sure how does improved AF will help high ISO. May be he meant it will help to capture the shot that was not practical earlier

It was a passing comment, but I interpreted it to also mean that with a higher probability of having a "shot in the dark" in good focus, detail was likely to hold up better.

 

[redhed17]

A couple of more things I remembered from last night's session:

- The Nikon rep was emphatic that the reason for the D500 delay was NOT a quality control issue, but rather that they had wildly underestimated initial demand.

Not doubting the chap, but I don't think he would have admitted to any problems, as that would be a major PR disaster.

- FWIW, he told an interesting anecdote about the "D400." According to his version, the D7200 was going to be called the "D400," but NikonUSA warned Japan that it would be a marketing disaster in the US to give a D7xxx-type body a three-digit name and try to pass it off as the D300 successor.

Good call by Nikon USA if true, and by Nikon Japan for listening to them.

Pity the message that there was actually a market for a proper 'D400' was never offered by or never got through. :-/

 

[luxun54]

why AF might play a roll with high ISO. Great reports. For me, personally, this supports what my thoughts were at the 3 events I attended.

Reading the thoughts of others, such as you guys, will keep me going during this LONG LONG wait until late April :-D

 

[Bill Dewey]

why AF might play a roll with high ISO. Great reports. For me, personally, this supports what my thoughts were at the 3 events I attended.

Reading the thoughts of others, such as you guys, will keep me going during this LONG LONG wait until late April :-D

 

[Another birder]

why AF might play a roll with high ISO. Great reports. For me, personally, this supports what my thoughts were at the 3 events I attended.

Reading the thoughts of others, such as you guys, will keep me going during this LONG LONG wait until late April :-D