# d500 on dxomark



## astroNikon (Jun 16, 2016)

and all the other test specs and comparisons => Nikon D500 camera tested at DxOMark | Nikon Rumors

D500 low light ISO = 1324
for comparison  vs
D750 = 2956
D810 = 2853

interesting

interesting comparison that I've been waiting for == > Nikon D500 vs Nikon D750 vs Nikon D600 | DxOMark


----------



## Peeb (Jun 16, 2016)

Good info!


----------



## jaomul (Jun 16, 2016)

In theory the d7200 beats it image quality wise. All reviews I have seen put the d500 just in front of the d7200 here, I always wondered about these dxo chart marks. Either way the numbers so close as to mean nothing.

Looks like anyone looking for a 10fps crop camera really have a winner here


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 16, 2016)

Well according to DXO The D7200 has a 87 overall sensor score putting it out in front of the D500,lower noise,more DR and better color depth but In the real world  its probably not even noticeable and I imagine after shooting a D500 not one person is thinking about anything DXO had to say or wished they went with the D7200.That Said I love my D7200 to Death.


----------



## cgw (Jun 16, 2016)

Unless you need the high fps, pro heft, pricey cards, and bragging rights...buy a D7200.


----------



## jcdeboever (Jun 16, 2016)

I want a D7200 in some ways but reality tells me to push forward with my D3300. I have a feeling I will not be shooting birds or my usual crap too much longer. I need to do something way different than flowers, birds, portraits, and sports. I am glad to work at a little of everything but frankly, I am bored with it all. I would like to do black and white macro shots of the wife's body but she said, "honey don't play that *hit".


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 16, 2016)

The D3300 has a fantastic sensor and on paper lower noise then the D7200 and more then capable for almost anything. Just because they call it a entry level there is nothing about theD3300 image quality that lacks.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 16, 2016)

jcdeboever said:


> I want a D7200 in some ways but reality tells me to push forward with my D3300. I have a feeling I will not be shooting birds or my usual crap too much longer. I need to do something way different than flowers, birds, portraits, and sports. I am glad to work at a little of everything but frankly, I am bored with it all. I would like to do black and white macro shots of the wife's body but she said, "honey don't play that *hit".


For me the big change upgrading from the D5200 to the D7100 was the addition of that second control wheel.  Being able to quickly and easily control both aperture and shutter speed was a godsend.  But the d3300 will produce some fantastic images, so really it's not the final product that will change so much as it is ease of use.  Which if course may or may not be worth it to you.

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## coastalconn (Jun 16, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> and all the other test specs and comparisons => Nikon D500 camera tested at DxOMark | Nikon Rumors
> 
> interesting
> 
> interesting comparison that I've been waiting for == > Nikon D500 vs Nikon D750 vs Nikon D600 | DxOMark


If you want to see something interesting, check out PDR when you are focal length limited with the three cameras..Which of course is how I shoot 
Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting
Or if you are comparing sensor only in the DX area (again focal length limited)(from Bill Claffs info on photonstophotos)  
                       MAX PDR   Low light ISO   Low Light EV
D500             10.59             2452                  9.62
D750(DX)     10.44             1785                  9.16
D810(DX)     10.81              1436                  8.84
He has a bunch of info on how he derives his numbers  Sensor Analysis Primer


----------



## PaulWog (Jun 16, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > I want a D7200 in some ways but reality tells me to push forward with my D3300. I have a feeling I will not be shooting birds or my usual crap too much longer. I need to do something way different than flowers, birds, portraits, and sports. I am glad to work at a little of everything but frankly, I am bored with it all. I would like to do black and white macro shots of the wife's body but she said, "honey don't play that *hit".
> ...



You could do that with the D5200. Just assign the buttons. When I held down the "FN" button and used the wheel, I controlled ISO. When I held down the record button and used the wheel, shutter speed. And wheel without any button, aperture.

Everyone talks about the D5200 as if you couldn't control it quickly. My D750 is no quicker to handle than my D5200 was, as far as controlling ISO, aperture, and shutter speed goes. What bugs me about that is that there are a lot of reviewers, and people posting on forums, who didn't even take the time to set up their camera properly.

Also those DXOMark numbers are strange. There are many direct side-by-side tests of high ISO on the D750 and D610 that show the D750 coming out ahead by a visible margin (ISO 6400 and up). The D500 also has some side-by-side tests that show it performs incrementally better in low ISO over previous crop sensor cameras (I think Tony Northrup had a decent comparison).


----------



## jaomul (Jun 17, 2016)

As said earlier the numbers probably don't mean a thing, everything being so close. The fact that one can shoot 10fps and get 20mp raw images with as good image quality as this camera does makes it very desirable.

In real life, the d7200 or d5xxx or even the d3xxx are probably enough for most people, but this d500 pulls all the stops out. It seems an excellent flagship crop camera


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 17, 2016)

Not a member of the video game generation, so anything that requires me to press and hold while using a dial just doesn't work out that well for me

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## astroNikon (Jun 17, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> Not a member of the video game generation, so anything that requires me to press and hold while using a dial just doesn't work out that well for me
> 
> Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


On my d7000 I learned how valuable it was for super quick adjustments to adjust the aperture and shutter at the same time as they are different wheels.  I don't do that super fast adjustments much anymore, but I easily can.


----------



## goodguy (Jun 17, 2016)

DarkShadow said:


> Well according to DXO The D7200 has a 87 overall sensor score putting it out in front of the D500,lower noise,more DR and better color depth but In the real world  its probably not even noticeable and I imagine after shooting a D500 not one person is thinking about anything DXO had to say or wished they went with the D7200.That Said I love my D7200 to Death.


Well the comparison is between the sensors and not the whole camera, the D7200 is a great general use camera, the D500 is a specialize sports camera.
I also agree the differences in the real world will not be big but the price is, so I would rather have a D7200 with pro glass over the D500.
Of course have good glass overall I would want the D500 mainly because of its killer AF system but then I'm a FF guy so I would want the D500 AF system on my D750


----------



## goodguy (Jun 17, 2016)

Here is a review by DxoMark of the D500 sensor, its a more thorough review

Nikon D500 sensor review: Performance redefined | DxOMark


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 17, 2016)

Thats what I have In mind now is better glass and not another body.Looking at the Nikon 300mm f/4 PF ED VR and Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art.


----------



## astroNikon (Jun 17, 2016)

Back when my d600 got damaged I played with the D750 and D500.

Oh-My ... the 10fps is certainly seductive irregardless of anything else.
Of course, it will create a plethora of files to process afterwards ...

If nikon replaces my d600 with a new d610 I might sell it and buy a d500 to go with the d750.


----------



## goodguy (Jun 17, 2016)

DarkShadow said:


> Thats what I have In mind now is better glass and not another body.Looking at the Nikon 300mm f/4 PF ED VR and Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art.


Wouldn't you want the 300mm 2.8


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 17, 2016)

No.f/4 is sufficient for wildlife In daylight.


----------



## jaomul (Jun 17, 2016)

DarkShadow said:


> No.f/4 is sufficient for wildlife In daylight.



Agree. Having used the 300 f2.8 vr and the af s 300 f4; I think the f4 is more usable and the better buy


----------



## PaulWog (Jun 17, 2016)

goodguy said:


> DarkShadow said:
> 
> 
> > Thats what I have In mind now is better glass and not another body.Looking at the Nikon 300mm f/4 PF ED VR and Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art.
> ...



The 300mm f2.8 VR-ii weighs 2.9kg (6.39lbs). That is almost identical to the 500mm f4e at 3.09kg (6.81lbs).


----------



## goodguy (Jun 17, 2016)

PaulWog said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > DarkShadow said:
> ...


Wow, that's a lot!


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 18, 2016)

PaulWog said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > DarkShadow said:
> ...


Exactly what i don't want is excessive weight.



goodguy said:


> PaulWog said:
> 
> 
> > goodguy said:
> ...


No doubt.


----------



## gckless (Jul 14, 2016)

Well, based on DXO, you would wonder why anyone would buy a D750 when a D600 is so much cheaper...

D500 is much like the D5 IMO. Not every crop shooter should buy a D500, just as not every FF shooter should buy a D5. They have their purposes, and I think people know if they need it or not. While the small drawbacks on the D500 may be insignificant in the real world, I gotta wonder if Nikon could have done a little less buffer space and upped another spec. Granted, they may not have been able to do anything without switching to the smaller (in file size) sensor, which probably brings the other things.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 14, 2016)

gckless said:


> Well, based on DXO, you would wonder why anyone would buy a D750 when a D600 is so much cheaper...


You're right and I have both of them.
But the AF is a major difference between the two (not the number of points but the way it functions and it's improved accuracy).  Plus the flippy screen, better ISO performance is noticeable, etc.


----------



## gckless (Jul 14, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> gckless said:
> 
> 
> > Well, based on DXO, you would wonder why anyone would buy a D750 when a D600 is so much cheaper...
> ...


Don't get me wrong, the D750 is more expensive for a reason and worth it, I guess my point was simply that DXO doesn't factor everything in needed to make a purchase decision. It's useful, but not the final say like some people (and not necessarily you) make it out to be.


----------



## coastalconn (Jul 14, 2016)

It's funny, I actually went with a D600 for my backup camera, basically because of price, DXO and Bill Claff's work show it's good enough for what I wanted.  DXO is very strange and voodoo like with their ratings though.  It is only a small piece of the puzzle and I think too many people treat it as the end all in their decision.  Kind of like using snapsort,  which uses "popularity" in one of their scores.  I'm sure the AF in the D750 smokes the D600, much like the AF in the D500 smokes just about anything...  And we all shoot different things and have different needs....


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 14, 2016)

Actually the d600 smokes the d750 AF in certain scenarios.  But mostly the d750s AF is superior.   Drove me nuts until I figured it all out.

I think I drove GoodGuy crazy with PMs about it .. I think he probably put me on ignore since then lol


----------



## nerwin (Jul 19, 2016)

I was reading somewhere that the D600/D610 doesn't use a Sony sensor? I thought it did.


----------



## Braineack (Jul 19, 2016)

it's a Sony-built IMX128, yes.


----------



## Braineack (Jul 19, 2016)

gckless said:


> Well, based on DXO, you would wonder why anyone would buy a D750 when a D600 is so much cheaper...



Because the D750 is a much better camera?


----------



## nerwin (Jul 19, 2016)

Braineack said:


> it's a Sony-built IMX128, yes.



Are you trying to tell me that someone on the internet was wrong? That can't be possible. Lol.


----------



## Braineack (Jul 19, 2016)

Considering most people make up facts before posting...



^---made up that stat.


----------



## gckless (Jul 19, 2016)

Braineack said:


> gckless said:
> 
> 
> > Well, based on DXO, you would wonder why anyone would buy a D750 when a D600 is so much cheaper...
> ...


That's my point. The D600 got higher ratings across the board.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 19, 2016)

gckless said:


> That's my point. The D600 got higher ratings across the board.



Ok, but I think your missing the most important factor here on which is the better camera.  Sure, the D750 has a better AF system.  So what.  It shoots faster.  Big deal.  Longer battery life.  Better screen.  Yada yada yada.

The only important question here, is do I own one.

No, I don't.  I do own a D600 but not a D750.  Ergo, the D600 is and will remain a far superior camera until such point as I can afford to purchase  the 750.  As soon as I do, somehow it will become a far better camera than the D600.

It's .. umm... physics....  Or something...


----------



## Braineack (Jul 19, 2016)

agreed. ;P


----------



## gckless (Jul 19, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> gckless said:
> 
> 
> > That's my point. The D600 got higher ratings across the board.
> ...


I mean yes, there's that aspect of it. But DXO rates by substantiated qualities. I'm not talking about who thinks which camera is better, I'm saying based on DXO alone there's no reason to get a D750. That much is black and white based on their numbers. My point is just that DXOmark isn't the final answer to everything as some people make it seem.

Wait a second, I think we're arguing the same point here...


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 19, 2016)

gckless said:


> Wait a second, I think we're arguing the same point here...



Umm... yup.

Lol


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 20, 2016)

gckless said:


> I mean yes, there's that aspect of it. But DXO rates by substantiated qualities. I'm not talking about who thinks which camera is better, I'm saying based on DXO alone there's no reason to get a D750. That much is black and white based on their numbers. My point is just that DXOmark isn't the final answer to everything as some people make it seem.
> 
> Wait a second, I think we're arguing the same point here...


I like the flippy screen


----------

