Jump to content

nikon d7500 released


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

-D500 sensor meaning less mpx and a lot less Dynamic Range. 

How to do qualify "a lot less"? Because I own a D500 and I don't see any major difference in dynamic range compared to my D800 or D750. The D500 is definitely not as good as the D750 for high ISO work, but I've not had any issues with dynamic range. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

A minor segway for people who wonder why the hell anyone would shoot on nikon still: I was editing stuff from my last shoot yesterday. Interior shot exposed for the exterior sky (so there was just a t

All I know is... my D5500's video looks more cinematic at 1080p than the G7 looks at 4K. The LX100 and it's 12MP sensor has more mojo than the G7 at 16MP. Now I'm not picking on the G7 or Panasonic or

Another non-starter for video, although as a stills camera I quite like it Nikon seem to have caught Canon-itis. A well known condition where you lose your memory and release the same camera ever

25 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Exactly my point. Putting 4K full sensor readout in the d7500 would have been retarded.

And my point is... there was nothing that put Samsung on the map in the first place. Until the NX1 came along that DID do a lot of things right hardware/feature wise, which is why the Samsung NX1 is now known and GH5 AF basher Max uses a couple of them for example to shoot weddings with. So... I actually wholeheartedly disagree that putting awesome specs in your cameras is a bad move.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

And my point is... there was nothing that put Samsung on the map in the first place. Until the NX1 came along that DID do a lot of things right hardware/feature wise, which is why the Samsung NX1 is now known and GH5 AF basher Max uses a couple of them for example to shoot weddings with. So... I actually wholeheartedly disagree that putting awesome specs in your cameras is a bad move.

The Samsung isn't known. In photography terms, the NX1 was basically just as meaningless as the ones before (there's no ecosystem, the lens lineup has a few gems and mostly meh stuff). And Mattias is right, most people who buy these cameras buy them for photography. The GH4 peaked at selling like 60 000 in a year if I remember right while Canon sells boatloads of every single (convoluted, barely distinguished) product line just with their brand recognition. The 5D III was just great in usability, people who actually shoot instead of arguing in internet forums don't care about 1 EV more or less of DR. When you go to stuff like "Wildlife Photographer of the Year" exhibitions, nearly everything is shot with Canon, also because of the eco system, reliability, professional services, etc. Is it great to shoot a D810 or A7r II and be able to push the shadows by 4 stops? Yes. How often do you do it? Once in 1000 pictures?

A close friend wanted to get into video and he gave up in no time. Doing videos on a scope exceeding filming with your mobile phone is just not for the masses, people don't want to use tripods, steadicams, gimbals, ND filters, external microphones and all that rubbish, they also don't want to invest that kind of money.

But I feel like this discussion comes up every 2 months and I'm sure someone argued it better than me before.

 

Actually I just remembered a bunch of years ago. Canon didn't give you spot-metering coupled to the active focus point on the non-1D models. The nerve! Total deal breaker. We were so enraged. We didn't really need it but curse them for not giving it to us! :astonished:

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is... my D5500's video looks more cinematic at 1080p than the G7 looks at 4K. The LX100 and it's 12MP sensor has more mojo than the G7 at 16MP. Now I'm not picking on the G7 or Panasonic or anyone else, but when a conversation arises about good, clean 1080p, the D5500 and the D750 always gets mentioned. And who cares about MPs? 21 MPs are more than enough.

I am excited for the D7500. The 4K video I've seen from the D500 looks great. The 1080p I've seen from the D500 with it's IS looks great. 

@jhnkng recently posted a video from the D500... I thought it was shot in 4K but it was actually shot in 1080p.

Yeah the crop could be better, but it's basically the same as the GH4 and IMO, the D500 has better 4K than the GH4.

But I do wish it had peaking. 

In the end, the cream rises to the top. And any camera from Panasonic, Sony, Canon or Nikon, etc... can be used to make a fine film.

A couple months ago, I told a story about how I was at the movie theatre over the holidays and the projector went haywire and the menu showed on the screen during the trailers. All of the trailers were being projected at 720p. Last week I worked a trade show and on their theatre sized screen, the video was being displayed at 720p video and it looked amazing.

So we should probably stop worrying about this spec and that spec and instead work on making better films.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am an NX user, my NX1/NX500/NX3000 cover ALL my needs (except lower to middle, and upper video jobs that I use video orientated cameras, and like Arikhan's friend, I believe that having a dedicated video camera is much more productive than a photo optimized one.); he lenses are exactly the ones I need, and a couple have no equivalent in any other APS-C system (excellent fish eye and 2-2.8f 16-50 workhorse),  and even though I can adapt whatever I want, I don't, and the main issue here, is that a camera of 2014 is better in most aspects than a camera that isn't out yet.

That is the sad thing about Nikon, CAN'T compete with a 2014 camera, and if you can't compete with an older one, how are you going to compete with the newer generation of cameras that are going to arrive this year, and the next?

I do not see a lot of people selling their 7200 to buy into this one, and I better spend more for the D500 (but of course, I won't, because I have spent less for a much better HYBRID camera already). This camera will be a flop, and Nikon has a few already these last couple of years, while the market is like wild wild west right now. There will be blood!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict this will be a huge success for Nikon. The photo features are great... and I'm unsure how many times people on this forum needs to be reminded that we are the minority customers of these cameras. And spec vs spec, sure the NX1 and NX500 wins, but why is it I still prefer the Nikon image to the Samsung?

I mean, minus AF points, for $750 less, you're getting a mini D500, which was reviewed as the best camera of 2016.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
2 minutes ago, mercer said:

I predict this will be a huge success for Nikon. The photo features are great... and I'm unsure how many times people on this forum needs to be reminded that we are the minority customers of these cameras. And spec vs spec, sure the NX1 and NX500 wins, but why is it I still prefer the Nikon image to the Samsung?

The DX lens range is very weak.

The price of the D7500 is too close to the full frame D750.

The D750 is a much better choice for most photographers.

The APS-C market is shrinking.

It doesn't do video right.

There's a huge crop in 4K.

The 1080p is 'meh'

I just don't see the appeal in the D7500 when you can get a D750 for a bit more money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The DX lens range is very weak.

The price of the D7500 is too close to the full frame D750.

The D750 is a much better choice for most photographers.

The APS-C market is shrinking.

It doesn't do video right.

There's a huge crop in 4K.

The 1080p is 'meh'

I just don't see the appeal in the D7500 when you can get a D750 for a bit more money.

+1000

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wont be buying one but I agree that it will sell by the truck load (after the first or second recall that it will surely have).      Wont be sold FOR video generally much but will be maybe stop some bleeding for the Nikon shooter getting a bit edgy about wanting better video but wont switch just yet.

I also agree the D750 would be a better choice for many (not all).

I think that plenty of Nikon stills shooters who can't quite get the D500 or FF users wanting the latest back up or D500 users wanting a similar second camera will go for it.

D7200 is still very good and better in some ways but wont stop this being a good, big selling camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Andrew Reid said:

The DX lens range is very weak.

The price of the D7500 is too close to the full frame D750.

The D750 is a much better choice for most photographers.

The APS-C market is shrinking.

It doesn't do video right.

There's a huge crop in 4K.

The 1080p is 'meh'

I just don't see the appeal in the D7500 when you can get a D750 for a bit more money.

The crop is the same as the GH4 with native lenses and less than the NX500. Most audiences rarely say after watching a movie... man I wish the crop factor was smaller. With faster lenses like the Tokina 14-20mm f2, you are basically at 28-40mm. 

The 1080p looks great...

I'd agree $1000 would be a better price point and when it gets below that, I'll probably buy it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, gethin said:

if anyone could care less: http://nikonrumors.com/2017/04/12/nikon-d7500-camera-announced.aspx/

Specs: http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d7500.html?icid=img_en_us:hp:banner:1:dslr:d7500:41217:wwa#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs

4k looks like a 1.3 crop of dx (just a guess on the basis of photo sizes shot in movie mode).

30min recording limit. No mention of bitrate. Electronic stabilisation.

Only thing of interest is active d-lighting in movie mode.

Still no zebras, peaking etc.  

144 mbps apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Its interesting that people keep on insisting that an APS-C with full sensor readout in 4K is something big companies like Canikon should build and that they would fly of the shelves.

Uhm.. remember Samsung?

It didn't sell at all. Companies like Canikon dont do stuff at random and without thought.

This notion across forums that we the random user possess some magic power that makes us more informed than the people spending billions in research and development is naive at best.

The video market is tiny. People go on about specs that would make it easier for some part time wedding shooter. Come on. I live in small town with maybe 100 000 people. Ill be surprised if even 10 shoots weddings.

Maybe 100 are into video at all. And by that I mean use a camera, import, edit, export and publish a video on for example social media.

But Im pretty sure every single one will at some point in their lifes take and publish a still.

People use their phones and if they really get into it they buy a camera with stills in mind. Video geeks like me are a tiny and dying breed.

Nikon is on its way down, marketing a new camera for video and have it ending up in the same section as the GH5. In other words having sales people say, "No, for stills you don't want that camera" would be suicide.

APS-C cameras are by far Canon's biggest sellers in the DSLR market. The people who buy those cameras use the video function, and they sure as hell would appreciate better quality output than what they currently do. Just because they buy those cameras and put up with the crap video output does not mean that they want crap video output.

The failure of Canon to provide decent video in their consumer cameras is the single reason I personally abandoned the brand. I am sure that there are many others like me, and those numbers grow by the day. Now I have a Samsung, some Sonys, even a Nikon (each with their own specialized application), but until Canon get their heads out of their ass and start providing competitive products that meet my needs, I will not buy any of their cameras.

I have a NX1 as my general all purpose quality camera, a pair of RX100s (M3 and M5) as travel/blog cameras and a P900 as a specialist portable telescope. I still have my G30, but I rarely use it nowdays as the IQ is hideous compared to what the NX1 and RX100 can do. My T3i is retired, along with all of the lenses I had for it. They are sitting in a box at the back of my gear cupboard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

The DX lens range is very weak.

 

But Sigma + Tokina + others now means we have an excellent selection range of DX lenses! 

 

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

The price of the D7500 is too close to the full frame D750.

 

The D750 is right at the end of its life cycle.....  the D7500 only just got released! (and D750 can't do 4K)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Cinegain said:

And my point is... there was nothing that put Samsung on the map in the first place. Until the NX1 came along that DID do a lot of things right hardware/feature wise, which is why the Samsung NX1 is now known and GH5 AF basher Max uses a couple of them for example to shoot weddings with. So... I actually wholeheartedly disagree that putting awesome specs in your cameras is a bad move.

Agreed. The NX1 was the first really competitive product that Samsung put out, and they had already started withdrawing from the market before the camera was even released. It was never given a fair chance with proper distribution and marketing.

45 minutes ago, mercer said:

The crop is the same as the GH4 with native lenses and less than the NX500. Most audiences rarely say after watching a movie... man I wish the crop factor was smaller. With faster lenses like the Tokina 14-20mm f2, you are basically at 28-40mm. 

The 1080p looks great...

I'd agree $1000 would be a better price point and when it gets below that, I'll probably buy it. 

The people shooting video with cameras like this usually want more DoF, not less, and typically shoot in good light, so FF has no real advantage for them and lots of disadvantages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared to D7200:

less mpx

less DR

SD card still does not support UHS-IImedia (like the D7200)

re-positioned camera strap lugs

still no Focus Peaking support in Live View

no separate AF joystick (like the D500)

$50 increase in list price (USD $1,250 vs $1,200) but twice the price of D7200 grey market

single SD slot (compared to the D7200 twin SD slot)

 lower resolution for the rear screen (922k vs 1.2M dot LCD) what a joke 

lower number of shots per battery charge (950 vs 1110)

no NFC feature (which the D7200 had)

anyone spending more money to get less than D7200 is out of his mind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Arikhan said:

@Cinegain

@Mattias BurlingYou think and write like a geek / enthusiast...But you belong to a micro niche market. The reality is like some weeks ago an old German public broadcast camera man told me: "You and your DSLR bullshit...If you want to shoot a film, buy a dedicated film camera or camcorder. Yes, even some of our people (mostly freelancers) shoot with DSLRs, but nobody takes them serious. DSLRs are toys...They are made to shoot photos...Sure, for some circumstances they do well, but generally buy a dedicated device for your  needs. Or do you ever try to make a coffee with a washing machine? After months of work and technical tweaking, it could probably work...But while loosing time with an unappropriate device, you could buy a dedicated coffee machine and immediately get good results..." - that's how a vast majority of people think.

 

Hey, I agree that people "demanding" Nikon release something like an NX1 or GH5 don't realize what a niche market they are.

That said, I make my living in good part from corporate videos. Gigs in the range of $2-$5k. I shoot 90% of that stuff with the NX1 and Nikkor glass. If I have to catch some sort of live event stuff, I take a shoulder mount video camera. I read all of these new camera announcements, hoping something will come out the beats the NX1 or will be there when it finally dies. I don't care what an aging German TV guy says, I do work that clients love, they feel I overdeliver, and I use the hell out of the NX. 4K is an absolute gamechanger for interview gigs with 1080 or 720 delivery; I had no idea how useful 120fps would be for b-roll, manufacturing, emotional stuff, and shooting plates for effects and so on.

Sure, it's imperfect, I'd be jazzed with a wired remote trigger for crane shots (I hear it's in one of the hacks) - but there's no "perfect" camera.

The NX1 might have made it if it came with a Canon strap - the freaking strap is the #1 accessory for consumers that buy $1k+ cameras (that's why I use 1970's hippie straps form eBay). I've shot Nikon for stills for 2 decades professionally, nothing since the D7100 has made me itch to upgrade (but F me, the NX1 is a hell of a stills camera and I only put Nikon glass on it - I'll skip AF to have that amazing VF that shows what my exposure looks like. Game changer for me as a stills guy for sure. Raw IQ is dynamite).

When it comes to digital stills, times are very very good indeed. At least Panasonic is trying to deliver a good 4K camera affordably with the GH5 (not thrilled with the tiny sensor myself). Ever since we all breathlessly awaited the D7200 (and watched that bubble burst), I don't think we should be expecting anything amazing from DSLR-form cameras (and yet Panasonic is offering higher bit rates to card, no idea how well implemented though). The BM micro is interesting to me, but the feature list I get with the NX1 seems yet to be matched in full, in one package - and yeah, I wouldn't shoot a broadcast spot with it that needed high-DR outdoor shots, but it checks a lot of buttons for me. If a camera that competent and forward-thinking couldn't make it on video specs, I don't see a lot of hope. Nikon and Canon heaved a big-ass sigh of relief when that died.

The photo market is in a panic-driven tailspin and the water's not gonna clear any time soon.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Members
9 hours ago, tugela said:

...The people who buy those cameras use the video function...

I dont belive that and see no evidence of it. I do however see alot that points to the opposite. So were just gonna have to disagree.

The majority of regular people who wants a camera other than a smartphone want an APS-C DSLR for stills.

Nikon knows this. Thats why they release the d7500. Of course they have looked into satisfying video geeks, so has Canon. But there is no money in it. 

Corporate gigs is the same as weddings, a tiny tiny tiny spec of a market.  If you show up with a GH5 at a company with 10 000 employees thats ONE camera sold. Meanwhile all of the 10 000 probably have a dedicated stills camera at home. Even though these years that number is shrinking due to smartphones.

According to sales figures you are way more likely to run into o a Film shooter armed with an Instax camera than a dude settings up his DSLR for video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Video is the future, and the present. Even small kids are sending video messages through social media. Words are something of the 19th century, photos 20th, 21 century is the video century and we are moving to 360 and VR.

Staying behind in video capabilities is not a clever marketing, they just can't compete.

Do not have the CPUs, the electronics, the sensors, the video orientation philosophy, and while Olympus and Fuji are playing the game the last couple of years, Nikon won't.

Tiny tiny markets, indeed, but high price equipments are not sold to the masses, the masses are buying 300euros phones with 16megapixel cameras, and that is just enough for their everything, the masses don't buy dSLRs anymore. That is so 2010's.

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...