Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR

This is something I don't get. If Magic Lantern guys can bring this function, why wouldn't big company like Nikon bring focus peaking? Is there any technical reason or it is just a marketing strategy?

Ha! If only all the magic the Magic Lantern guys have performed were indicative of what manufacturers would put in their cameras... cough ETTR cough :)

AU, image quality is just one factor when deciding what camera to use. The D500 is geared toward professionals... 10 fps for 200 shots. D7200/5500/5200 can't get out of its their way compared to that. Those cameras bury too many often-needed functions in the menu system instead of allowing you to change them quickly with a button or thumbwheel or whatever. We haven't seen good samples yet, but my guess is the high ISO performance will be outstanding. So the image quality will be there, but in the form of less noise at high ISO, not the number of pixels. I shoot a lot of images for magazines and have double truck spreads in glossy editions shot with my D300s and they look amazing...and that's 12MP.

Pete: Agree with you 100%; Different from you I'm just a semi-retired guy who takes a lot of pictures, and can afford good cameras. For me the new camera will be great with faster, more accurate focus, for kids, pets, waves and whatever. I like what I see of the D500 partly because it's small and its lenses will be smaller than ff. I love the web because I can share my pictures with my friends and family; it brings us all closer together, and better pictures make the process that much more enjoyable. For me, the challenge of APS-c is low light/ high ISO, because of the number of pictures I take in not so good conditions. The mp of this camera is plenty enough for me, but as I said, I am looking for iq equal to my D750 in low light.

Turns out we cover new cameras.

So, here is an idea. Don't read every article.

By the way, a film camera packed with latest tech would be something interesting, I think. It's not bad to be nostalgic :)

You're right. Reading these comments we can conclude that most of the posts come from amateurs and point in shoot camera users. Unfortunately, the photography professionals are in the minority.

Wrong Nico. What DSLR can shoot at 15 fps? There are multiple mirrorless cameras that can do that. You talk about ergonomics, but some of the Fuji camera users I've encountered in the Sigma camera forum seem to LOVE the ergonomics of their Fuji mirrorless cameras, even better than their Sigma SD1 bodies, which is one of the most ergonomic camera bodies in existence.

You mention that mirrorless cameras "need to innovate" . . . but that is EXACTLY what they are all about. Every new mirrorless camera is an innovation over the previous one. Just look at the new Sony mirrorless cameras, and you will get a taste. Have you even looked closely at the A7r II? (It's not for me, because I like to have a GPS and a fully-articulating screen, but it sure is one amazing camera.)

Yeah, 15 fps without focus, who needs that ?! My iPad probably shoots faster than my nikon but there's not comparison otherwise. Ergonomics means having a great viewfinder, a good grip on the camera, dedicated buttons for the main functions, good battery life, and mirorless cameras are mostly poor at that. The A7 does look like it's nice to hold but having an electronic viewfinder and poor battery life would not make it my first choice. And it's all downhill from there, how pleasurable is it to hold a fuji for an extended amount of time ? How nice is it to use such an EVF in a low light scenario. The guys from DPR jokingly tried to walk looking thru a EVF in a dark parking lot and they got dizzy from the lag. I might be overly picky because I rely on my cameras for work but I feel that people that dismiss DSLR's never even picked one or don't have any interest in serious photography. I, on the other hand, did try some mirrorless cameras from Samsung, Oly and Nikon and were terrible.

Well, I really don't understand what is holding Canikon to take mirrorless more seriously. DSLR is not bad, I like it, but Mirrorless with EVF clearly has a lot of fans. Why is Canikon not tapping this market? Is that so hard to ditch the dedicated AF? Or the problem is the lens mount? Or it is because the market is shrinking so much that they don't see much value to invest in a new set of tech?

That old race horse D500 will probably outsell Olympus total lineup.

And you think there is value in your comment? Obviously you don't know that dslrs are dinosaurs and the future is cell phone cameras.

Try the Phase One XF - https://luminous-landscape.com/the-new-phase-one-xf-camera-system/

@TSeiler: Seems you have an "iphony" 6, still instead of making nice photos with that (btw cr*ppy) phone, turns out you read this Nikon topic.. Interesting.. :D
#ROTFLMAO

$300,000 for a supercar?!!! ROTFLMAO. I prefer my 1992 Civic.

Maybe so. But I feel that actually what makes this body so special is the system itself. Body is just one part of the equation. Even if Samsung has a better body, the system has not many options to really makes it a better experience.
Anyway, I assume you're talking about NX-1. But as far as reviews goes, it is not better than 7D-2. Focus is slower and accuracy is not good when you rack zoom it. The screen goes black while you shoot in burst. Nikon itself seems to be more concerned about A6000.
Apart that, I feel that the consensus is that D500, if promises what is advertising, has enough specks to make people change system. I was very tempted by the snap bridge feature. I think only Samsung has got one of those? Should be standard for any camera.

The NX1 is a remarkable camera, but it is close to stop behind the D7200 at high ISO, and not as good as the 7200 at Sports tracking.
It is exemplary at many things though, resolution, build, wifi, video, in body VR. etc. I am too invested in the Nikon system to stray, but I would have loved to see what the NX2 would have brought to the table. Samsung dumping it's camera business is the most regrettable news in years, and considering the NX1, one of the least expected. At least they went out with a bang, and not a whimper.

Seriously, the discontinued NX1 that can't focus properly in daylight ? You have got to be kidding.

It must be said, if you really like camera gear and you pay attention to the engineering that goes into the latest gear, you cannot fail to be impressed with the achievement of the Samsung NX1.

Seriously, it is an EPIC piece of kit and simply one of the most advanced and well designed cameras EVER made. Whoever the Samsung engineers are who created it, they deserve to be recognised, even if brand fanboys and prejudice mean that too many people failed to recognise just how good it is.

Until this Nikon came along, at a pure tech level the NX1 was clearly the leading APSC cam. In many respects I suspect it still betters the D500.

This camera is geared towards pros. Pros don't use pop up flashes.

I agree. The D200 and D300 had a pop-up flash, and they were just fine! Nothing wrong with having something like that. Why would they get rid of such a feature? Now I have to carry around an extra thing with me, when I go out and about with my camera and super-zoom lens, if I have the D500. It's a reason to NOT buy it and get the D7200 instead. Stupid Nikon. They can't just do it right. They have to screw up somehow. I know there are some people who would say something like, but the weather sealing is going to be better this way, and that's probably true, but for someone who wants a better all-around everyday camera than the D7200, this D500 could have been it. Now we have to wait for an upgrade, though the D7200 sure is a nice camera with a pretty big buffer. No 4K video though, unfortunately. I guess Nikon wants to hold back and have a way to sell us more cameras in the future.

Have you used the pop up flash often? Be honest.

On my last camera, I think I used it... twice in the 4 years I owned it.

Actually, the group IS very small. Almost NOBODY will buy the D5 and only a few more than that will buy a $2,000 DSLR. The future belongs to the mirrorless bodies, which are slowly replacing the DSLR bodies. EVENTUALLY Canon and Nikon will make full-frame mirrorless bodies, which will be capable of doing things that a DSLR could never dream of doing, such as shooting at 20 fps, while offering a view of what is being shot (by showing 3 frames of each shot, because the refresh rate of the electronic viewfinder is 60 fps). They will offer tilting viewfinders and fully-articulating review screens that will display simultaneously - things that can't be done with a DSLR (as far as I know).

But I wouldn't go so far as to say "Utterly pointless . . ." There is a market for a better, new DSLR with an APS-C sensor. There is also a market for a better, new DSLR with a full-frame sensor. There is nothing wrong with a better buffer, more speed, and 4K video capability, is there?

Drop a $6,000 camera and it will break. Just because the review screen flips out does not make it impossible to break. Besides, when was the last time you heard about a flip-out screen breaking? I've had five digital still cameras now that had flip-out screens (one from Canon, one from Nikon, and three from Sony), and NONE of them ever had a problem with the flip-out screen. I had a few video cameras with flip-out screens over the years too, and I never had a problem with one of those screens either. The whole idea that the flip-out screen is going to be a problem is a stupid idea and photographers need to get over it. I think they are. We see a LOT more cameras with them these days, and almost everyone who tries a camera with that feature likes it.

selfies with a FX-size DSLR? seriously?! and complaining about virtually non existent added "bulk" while no problem carry around (i quote) "my 5D M3 and 6D". this guy is really something! :)

There are so many more things EVF can do that OVF can't.
OVF is just like CRT vs LCD, obsolete. Only those only using OVF don't know.

Nikon knows. They showed a side by side comparison that showed the superiority of an OVF during an action sequence at the presentation of the cameras. As they said on an earlier occasion. "This is formula One - we cant have second best solutions".

@surlezi
Kiddo, try using EVF to shoot action, animals or anything else in dark environments.
If you are shooting landscapes or people not moving in the middle of the day, fine and good for you. But please do not assume that everybody else is too.
EVF in examples above are junk and that is proven by the fact that NOBODY is using them in those conditions. Not to mention the fact that anything that has an EVF has abysmal AF tracking that is akin to DSLR AF in 1980s ;)

Obviously you've never used a Leica SL nor an A7RII, even not an A7S... The 80's might be over for you, but still living in the 90's .

OVF beats EVF, in any action photographs. EVFs seem to be quite 'unnatural' in serious photography. Nikon knows what it is doing!

Wonder why the put Auto Focus in it. Manual Focus is for serious photography. Who needs Auto Focus anyway, just as useless as a EVF. OVF FTW and party like it's 1999.

When EVF lags, you can see as in daylight through it, while it's pitch dark in your OVF.

I'm sorry, but I don't think the A77 II has abysmal AF tracking that is acin to DSLR AF in the 1980s . . . or even in the 1990s. In fact, I've read that it's actually better than the Nikon D300s, which many people have been so happy with for so long.

No, the A77 II is not mirrorless, but that camera has an EVF, which works just fine for shooting action. I shoot with an A65, which is fine for shooting action, and it shoots as fast as the Nikon D500. I don't think you really know what you're talking about Der Steppenwolf.

PerL
Are you kidding, when it's dark, it's dark in your OVF and you just see nothing while it's daylight in A7S.

PerL
You understand a good EVF only lags in very low light ? If the light is enough for a fast shutter speed, a good EVF doesn't lag.

Moreover there is no such thing as "enough light for fast shutter", cause there is another parameter called ISO (sensitvity), and if you can increase it in a usuable manner then it allows you that much more speed.

surlezi,
The "slideshow effect" - that EVFs struggles to show a real time live view at the highest fps - occurs even in good light.

Well, it's hard to beat OVF if the point is to follow fast action. Any other situation EVF is better, with live exposure preview, histogram, with the added bonus that it shares the same AF as the Live View.

Having said that, OVF is still good enough to take pictures in general, of course. It's not that a ground breaking tech that would change the way we take picture, as it was when we went digital. But it's a tech that most probably will replace EVF.

You must have absolutely ginormous hands. I have big hands and have no trouble with a GM5.

@enenzo
Until mirrorless has an AF that can actually track and battery time worth mentioning people that shoot anything that moves are forced to use DSLR.
In future that might change, but remember we are living and using cameras in the present.

@Der Steppenwolf
I believe many reviews of the Sony A7R M2 clearly stats that it's AF system offer benefits over high-end DSLRs. And regarding battery life. That should not keep you from buying the camera of the future :-) The future is now...

Ovf is horrible. Tried shooting some football players and it lags. I was using the sony ar7ii. Until that is fixed, i will stick to dslr's

It have seen some friends starting out with mirror less but eventually went with DSLR because it was too small to hold comfortably.

Or just use MF and F/22 for all shots, using ISO 3, 280,000.

Just kidding.

The acid test to conduct is to have experienced action shooter shoot side-by-side with D5 and upcoming 1Dx II. Ideally it should cover various types of sports and subject-backgroung combos. I have a suspicion that both bodies will do a excellent job (and fail sometimges) and it is more of a personal preference of the camera body ergonomics and existing lenses than outright features of different bodies.

Good one. :)

Yes, but to quote Jeremy (Clarkson): "if you want to invade a country, use a tank...". In other words, D5 is not quite the A7RII from usage perspective.

DSLR is for real mans, not for the weaks.. :)

You forgot to factor in the weight of a battery grip and the 6 extra batteries the A7r II would need to match the D5 battery life.

Just kidding. But no, DSLRs are hardly that heavy, the D750 doesn't weigh much more than an A7R and the added weight is usually a bonus when using lenses over 300G.

Cameras are tools, not a fashion acessory.

:) Be prepared..
Soon the migthy 1DX Mk II and the 5D Mk IV will just pop up, and those Canon bodies will bring balance in Force in the DSLR Universe..
Yes, they are the chosen ones, the very last hope of the Canonian Galaxy, to save the Universe from the evil Dark Side! :D

You're welcome, glad to hear that you're on top of it (as usual)!

Bottom line is it shoots 200 continuous raw/jpg 14 bit compressed with XQD, and points to a massively improved buffer throughput. From the shooters POV this is huge, and slays it's competition.

To have something to compare it with, the same exercise for the 7d2 (but with certainty on the file size, since I own the camera) gave me a an estimated buffer size of 484MB.

These numbers are very comparable, and hint strongly to the fact that the great maximum burst performance of the D500 is to be attributed entirely to the fast XQD/SD interfaces, and not to a particularly large buffer. It is also worth noting that 468/30 = 15.6, not far from the number that Horshack saw in the D500 viewfinder (14). The D5 instead reported 99 shots, which would suggest that its buffer has indeed grown considerably in size.

As a final point, a bit of sensitivity analysis, since we made an assumption on the files sizes: the same calculations with 25MB and 35MB files yield respectively a buffer size of 98MB (unlikely) and 838MB, which is still not that for from the one of the 7d2.

On the subject of which, the EM1 is long overdue for replacement now.

Good comments, Rishi, and your contributions to DPReview are excellent.

All these benchmarks are fine, but what I want to see from this price point and position in a model line is durability and working well in reasonable temperature extremes.

So E-M1 with continuous AF at 10 fps is just like a D500. Right?

Right?

NOBODY KNOWS! Until we see frames and video, it is all a bunch of hypothetical specification nonsense. I own a TON of nikon glass and I shoot for a living. Even so, I have seen comparisons of the sony low light, low noise solutions that blow canon and nikon out of the water—as in NO COMPARISON. I am hoping Nikon has turned a corner on noise reduction. Nobody is going to shoot at 3.2 million ISO, but will the frames be cleaner at, say 10,000 ISO? I shoot a TON at low light, but I simply do NOT want Sony anything. Their design and style make me cringe. Am I pleased the D5 has 4K video? Absolutely. There is no question if the spec's we read deliver the goods IN THE FRAMES, this is worth $8400 in Canada. I can make that back in 8 days of shooting. It is clear the D5 is currently unfinished. Until we see the frames; until we can review noise from low light shots, we're all just shovelling sh*t against the tide with these (currently) pointless arguments. C'mon March! I'm counting the days.

And incidenkally (and as I am sure this comment will upset everyone with an EM1)...Until the EM1 is a full-size sensor, it is out of place comparing ANY features of autofocus at 10 frames et al with a full sensor capture to a Nikon D5 (or D4) or the equivalent Canon gear. There is no relevant comparable side by side capture quality that a pro can use—not when we're talking about professional rigs. Obnoxious to mention, but true.

Just saying that the E-M1's continuous AF system isn't likely to keep up with the D500's, especially not in continuous bursts, and furthermore there's the unquestionable issue surrounding following subjects during continuous bursts with a live optical feed vs. a stop-motion playback of last shot images. There's also the issue of the E-M1 up against possibly the best subject tracking system in the world (Nikon 3D tracking), so the comparison against the E-M1 is largely irrelevant.