Jump to content
tugela

Nikon D500

Recommended Posts

Even with the crop on the D500, if it gives me the D750's DR and color in 4K with good RS performance I will buy it. Hell just give me excellent 1080p and I'll still buy it for the still capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Nikon has always been full of shit for video until the D810/D750 but this now shows again they suck.

The good news now is how Canon will react with all Nikon bodies having 4K (if it were only the D5.... but now even their DX body D500 has it so the D5600 and so on will)? 
It is not bad news, we did not expect to see some 4k 60fps 10 bit prores on a Nikon body today did we? At least it might move a bit the competition ass.

A big shame though that Nikon did not buy Samsung camera division. NX1 tech in a D760 full frame body, who is in? :)

By the way did you see the D5 has touchscreen ??!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The combination of the 2.2 crop factor in 4k and the Nikon F mount makes for a really uninteresting camera in my opinion. It's like shooting a GH4 with adapted DSLR lenses but no option of a speedbooster. I see it as a pure spec sheet gimmick for marketing.

I went from "omg I need it!" to "why would anyone use that?" in the time between the anouncement and people posting the specs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went from "omg I need it!" to "why would anyone use that?" in the time between the anouncement and people posting the specs.

All big announcements are like that, from 'the best thing in the universe', to 'oh my god what a pile of shit' but finally settling on 'a potentially useful interesting new tool'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most big announcements are like that, from 'the best thing in the universe', to 'oh my god what a pile of shit' but finally settling on 'a new and interesting tool'

Agreed. But then here is nothing really new, these are just incremental upgrades over previous products with 4k as a "me too" gimmick. I feel like Nikon and Canon kinda dropped the ball when it comes to technology. I work in marketing so I'm fully aware that selling products has nothing to do with having the best or even a good product but more with brand image, etc. On many photography forums people still suggest Canon 760D to people who look for video because "Canon makes the foto camera with the best video".

It's obviously in the interest of big companies to make the lowest investment possible to make an incrementally improved product that will sell and still can easily be replaced with the next incremental upgrade next year. Like Sony used to fix firmware problems by launching a successor product, the Canon Rebel line bringing a new camera every year with 99% identical specification, etc. Obviously this is not in the interest of enthusiasts but it's the reality.

If you look at Canon C100 II, Samsung NX1, BMPCC and the Sony A7s... Imagine throwing the technology of these cameras together, the product would be incredible. But then how would they sell us the next iteration in a year if we're happy? Curved screen? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The combination of the 2.2 crop factor in 4k and the Nikon F mount makes for a really uninteresting camera in my opinion. It's like shooting a GH4 with adapted DSLR lenses but no option of a speedbooster. I see it as a pure spec sheet gimmick for marketing.

I went from "omg I need it!" to "why would anyone use that?" in the time between the anouncement and people posting the specs.

Exactly!

I like APS-C. You cut the costs by not going with fullframe tech, you got the compact formfactor, still a considerable enough bump up from M4/3 performance/rendering wise. But then give me something APS-C mirrorless. Like you said. Give it a flexible mount. Then you can add smart adapters and get decent performance out of Canon and Nikon glass. You can get near fullframe aesthetics with focal reducers. Keeping it affordable, keeping the option to keep things really compact and light and still getting enough out of it.

I'm looking for a nice hybrid shooting solution...

GH4 - nothing to fancy about its stills... ISO1600-6400 to be avoided, ISO not much better with Olympus, better on stills and color, but then video is meh

D5500 - great, but not mirrorless, video mode bit iffy - D750 - not mirrorless either

NX1 - dead system, thin native lens line-up, mount without availlability of smart adapters and focal reducers

What does kinda look good is... the A6000 - mirrorless: check, stills performance, not too shabby, mount flexibilty: love it!, video features: could use a bit of an upgrade given the fact they've done intriguing stuff with the RX10M2, RX100IV, A7RII and A7SII lately

So... I guess the A6100 is the camera that at the moment gets my most interest. If it turns out to be a mini A7RII, then count me in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the FHD crop is 1.3x the aps-c crop? What? That sounds oddball?

No,no, its DX but you can also record 1080p at 1.3 crop (My guess is that it's for 60fps? like on the d7100)

 

So... I guess the A6100 is the camera that at the moment gets my most interest. If it turns out to be a mini A7RII, then count me in.

I will be probably buying an a6100, but if the d5600 also gets active d light it might be more interesting for the retarded travel videos I do. Imagine the d5600 gets real 4K, woudln't surprise me at all knowing nikon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No,no, its DX but you can also record 1080p at 1.3 crop (My guess is that it's for 60fps? like on the d7100)

I will be probably buying an a6100, but if the d5600 also gets active d light it might be more interesting for the retarded travel videos I do. Imagine the d5600 gets real 4K, woudln't surprise me at all knowing nikon.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I suddenly become colour blind or there is hideous magenta instead of reds and redish browns all over the place in these D5 videos. Almost all people in the videos that probably have somewhat reddish skin in reality, look totaly pink/magenta to me (they look like they drink two bottles of moonshine every day, even the girls). Also that shots with rocky hills or that road between the fields, instead of reddish browns, magenta all over the place. The rest of the colours look great, especially the sky blues and yellowish browns. I don't know, it could be the grade, too early to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I suddenly become colour blind or there is hideous magenta instead of reds and redish browns all over the place in these D5 videos. Almost all people in the videos that probably have somewhat reddish skin in reality, look totaly pink/magenta to me (they look like they drink two bottles of moonshine every day, even the girls). Also that shots with rocky hills or that road between the fields, instead of reddish browns, magenta all over the place. The rest of the colours look great, especially the sky blues and yellowish browns. I don't know, it could be the grade, too early to tell.

They always do it on the promotional videos, it's horrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it caries the IQ similar to a D750 its a total winner.

I love the image from the D750, much more than the NX1 or GH4.

Sorry to go off topic a bit ... really enjoyed your D750 review. Can I ask ... with your settings on the "FL" Picture Control, are you leaving everything as default (at zero) with the exception of sharpening which would be dialled down to zero from 1? I see you can dial contrast and saturation down even further to the negative zone but not sure if this is a good idea. Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a D810 owner with a ton of Nikon glass I was very excited at the announcement, would have solved a lot of issues for me as a hybrid shooter, but those crops are bullshit. And the 3min time limit? What year are we in? 

I own and shoot Sony mirrorless and the GH4, but I'd love Canon or Nikon to build me a decent 4K full-frame DSLR (that isn't a 1DC).
I'll pay up to $5k. I don't need high iso either. We have other tools for that. I just want a rock-solid video and stills machine in regard to color rendition and artifacts. 

I have all the glass. I just need the body fellas! 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said this before. These camera companies constantly consultation with one another as to what they are going to turn out and who is going to up the ante from time to time. And I'm willing to bet that there is an agreement in place that everyone sticks to where none of them will put forward revolutionary products or features that undermine those of their competitors. I know it sounds half crazy, especially with competitive nature of capitalism being what it is, but it's the only thing that can explain this slow trickle of infuriating incremental updates and releases. And, you would think that companies like Blackmagic would be the wildcard that would tear the traditional players a new asshole but I'm not so sure about their approach either. And if this is actually the case, then I'm left scratching my head on where the fuck are the Chinese cannibalistic opportunists? I really start to see the value in looking back in time for my next camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost thought the day would never happen, but the "mythical" Nikon D400 has now been announced at long last! (but named "D500" now instead, to mirror the FX D5 announced at the same time)
 
And once again Nikon is first, just like they were first with an HD DSLR, they're now first with a 4K DSLR (unless you want to count the utterly ridiculously priced Canon 1D C from Canon :-/ ).
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn this video look sooooooo video and absolutely not cinematic... The nikon Dynamic range quality should allow more ease on the cinema look of the footage... Maybe these video presentations where made with not so good calibration of the camera... It looks like any movement goes on a blocky blurry road of pixel before stabilising.  Anyway , it feels not so good compared to the sony and panasonic last 4k bodies. As we cannot know more, I am waiting for the next test of these cameras. The colors seem so 8bit h.264 that I don't see the point spending in these cameras if you're not a still potographer. I still prefer a good hd raw bmpcc to a blocky 8bit h264 even in 4k... and if shooting 4k is in your interest to produce good hd in 10bits 422 it still is under the quality of the bmpcc in hd raw... (wich looks soooo cinematic by the way).

Why not any manufacturer chose to make a good still camera with raw hd video up to 60 or 120f/s at least?

Are we destined to always use compressed video?

Does a still professionnal photographer deserves compressed 8bit h.264 when shooting for a sport event or national geographic, or anything else and choosing to shoot a short video testimonial next to his full still installation/quality?

All these questions seem to interest far more sony than any other brands. 

It shows that by not taking seriously the video capabilities, even still photographers are not taken seriously anymore.

It also feels like this camera will be very quickly replaced by a new one. Why produce such an expensive body with such short commercial life ?

 

All these considerations are not about the stills capabilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Shot in 4K with the D5

Maybe im biased because of the NX1, but this doesnt look good at all.

The D500 seems outdated, and something that should cost 1000$ less, idk why they thought it would be ok to have 2.1x crop. The D5, as incredible as it will certainly be for stills, doesnt look good in video, I dont care for the 3 min limit, since I usually record short clips, but the image is simply not there, and judging from some clips and even the thumbnail, the DR looks quite terrible. The image lacks detail, looks muddy, and if anyone told me "This clip is from the D800" Id still think its a bad clip, since i've seen the D800 do much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...