D500

redhed17 said:
So the camera filled the first card, took another 141 pics to the second card, put another pic on the first card, then took another 540 pics and then put another on the first card. The first pic was 20.6MB, and the second was 20.7MB. so there was at least 41.3MB of space when the camera said the first card was full. :thinking: I'd rather it didn't do this, but looks like there is no choice. Weird that I have never noticed it happen with my previous camera.
Click to expand...
The joys of Nikon quirks :rolleyes:
 
redhed17 said:
So the camera filled the first card, took another 141 pics to the second card, put another pic on the first card, then took another 540 pics and then put another on the first card. The first pic was 20.6MB, and the second was 20.7MB. so there was at least 41.3MB of space when the camera said the first card was full.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Presumably the first batch of 141 pics weren't *all* larger than 41. 3MB, and the second batch of 540 pics weren't *all* larger than 20.7MB?

[EDIT] Actually I've just looked at the D500 specs and this is possible depending on what image file formats you were using. Can you clarify this? Also, can you say how many images were on the card when it first decided it was full?
 
Last edited:
I'm at work atm, so will clarify a bit more later. I only shoot RAW, and the images while I was away ranged from 30MB and 14.6MB. Most of them were averaging 20MB, but it put 41.3MB back on the card it said was full, so something was not quite right.

Edit* OK, so the camera took 1600 RAW images on the first 32GB XQD card, and then said it was Full and started writing to the second SD card. It recorded 141 RAW files ranging from 17MB to 30MB, before suddenly putting a 20.6MB file on the first XQD card. This image was the first image of the day when the previous night had been taking images in the dark with a number of images with smaller file sizes than 20MB.

It then put another 540 images on the second card throughout the day before putting another 20.7MB file on the first card again during taking pics at night. Throughout the day there was a number of images with file sizes smaller than 20.7MB, so have no idea what has been going on there. :thinking: I could maybe understand writing one file to the first card if it was an exceptionally small file size even though it said it was Full, but not two mid sized files when there had been many smaller file sizing prior to these two files. :confused: As I said, weird.
 
Last edited:
markyboy.1967 said:
Gramps, i was thinking that. I use the 2nd slot for jpeg most of the time however depending on what I'm doing i sometimes change to raw...Will get a 95Mb/s card i think as i don't machine-gun any of my cameras.
Click to expand...
I always shoot RAW Mark and when I have just used the SD (no XQD in slot 1) I have never experienced a problem, even with a fast action sequence.
 
I think I'm getting a bottleneck due to my SD card. I'm shooting genuine 95mbs Sandisk cards with my Lexar 2933x , but compared to my D5 ( 2 x XQD) I think I'm noticing a slow down.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
Folks, what speed of SD cards are you using in your D500.I have fast XQD cards but wondered what SD cards you are using.
Click to expand...
im using the sandisk 95mb cards with the lexar 2933x xqd using sd as backup. im not shooting lots of bursts though so never had a problem with speed.
 
RichardMills said:
im using the sandisk 95mb cards with the lexar 2933x xqd using sd as backup. im not shooting lots of bursts though so never had a problem with speed.
Click to expand...

Same XQD cards as i use in the D500 and D4s- never had issues. Will get the 95Mb/s SD cards. Need another 32g XQD as well as a spare.
 
Hello Guys,

Sorry I not been around for a bit due to some issues.. But am I pretty sure no one would of missed all my bloody questions LOL..

Anyway I have quite a few images to process and though I just post on I have just done to show I am still taking images..


DSC_0575-Edit.jpg by Andrew Rookes, on Flickr
 
Can't believe how dead it is on TP these days.
 
Got a D500 on the way from Panamoz. It's a stop-gap whilst the D810 is repaired. May keep it and sell the 810 if I like it enough. This thread has been quite useful in picking up some hints and tips.
 
OK, talking about the D500, and some user experiences. I went on holiday the other week and found the D500 metering to be more inconsistent than my D300S. I've been to the same location a few times with the D300S, taking similar pictures, so I have a good idea of how that camera performed in similar circumstances.

There were a few mid brightness scenes that really underexposed when it it shouldn't have. I found myself bracketing exposure more, either measured +1, +2, measured -1, -2 or measured -1, +1 dependent on the scene. Used in conjunction with the continuous shooting mode it was very quick to do, but I would rather it was a consistent as my D300S was.

I think a lot of newer camera take into account more what is under the focus point used even when using the multi meter. Note sure that was the problem in some instances. :thinking:
 
redhed17 said:
OK, talking about the D500, and some user experiences. I went on holiday the other week and found the D500 metering to be more inconsistent than my D300S. I've been to the same location a few times with the D300S, taking similar pictures, so I have a good idea of how that camera performed in similar circumstances.

There were a few mid brightness scenes that really underexposed when it it shouldn't have. I found myself bracketing exposure more, either measured +1, +2, measured -1, -2 or measured -1, +1 dependent on the scene. Used in conjunction with the continuous shooting mode it was very quick to do, but I would rather it was a consistent as my D300S was.

I think a lot of newer camera take into account more what is under the focus point used even when using the multi meter. Note sure that was the problem in some instances. :thinking:
Click to expand...
Yep, metering is more tricky for landscapes as the metering puts a certain amount of weighting into the focus point as you say. I think they need to implement a landscape matrix metering mode as well that is genuinely the whole scene.
 
I never really got on with my D500 as i felt i was using it in the same situation on when i wanted my D4s. Just sold it to a mate this week and im picking up a D810. The D810 suits my needs better and fits in nicely for different situations from my D4s. Still a good camera though and if i never had the D4s i would have kept it but the ability to crop in tight on the D810 and its usefullness for landscapes it is a better fit in my current libe up.
 
rookies said:
Who says we can't do portraits on our D500 I just don't know.. I have quite a few good ones and here one of them.. I had to tone down the details it brought to the skin as it did show up a lot of details but I prefer skin to be a bit smooth..


DSC_0299-Edit.jpg by Andrew Rookes, on Flickr
Click to expand...
No-one Andy ;) :p Nice pic.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
I never really got on with my D500 as i felt i was using it in the same situation on when i wanted my D4s. Just sold it to a mate this week and im picking up a D810. The D810 suits my needs better and fits in nicely for different situations from my D4s. Still a good camera though and if i never had the D4s i would have kept it but the ability to crop in tight on the D810 and its usefullness for landscapes it is a better fit in my current libe up.
Click to expand...
it would be interesting to hear your thoughts a cropped 810 image quality against an uncropped 500 image. I do mainly birds at the moment, but also do portraits and landscapes. As I don't have much money to throw around buying several cameras, I've been wondering whether something like a used 810 Would be a good all rounder?
Great for landscapes and portraits, but would allow more of a crop to compensate for the lost reach when compared to a dx camera?
 
Last edited:
Thats exactly my thoughts. Its slower than the D500 but i have a fast camera. Only bought the D500 to replace my old D300 then thought why i did that as i havent used the D300 for so long.I will leave the D810 in full frame and just crop when required and its more suitable for landscapes. Maybe look at a D500 again but not this year.
 
My D810 has just been sent off to the dealers for sale. Just wasn't using it after buying the D500, which I have put on 16k actuation's since purchasing in January 2017.... The D810 with the 36mp and 24mp crop mode is excellent, but for my arthritic fingers/thumbs I just find the joystick on the D500 so much easier to use for my 95% garden wildlife photography.... Not sure if I was seeing much of a difference between my previous 3 x D750's, D810 & the D500 noise wise for my use when I look back over my photos, but the DR on the FF cameras is obviously better. Perhaps filling the frame with the D500 is better with my lenses and bigger primes maybe would be better for cropping abilities with the FF cameras???......... Hope I don't regret it, but will keep an eye on the D760/D820 release and see if they come with a joystick.

I will probably buy a 300mm PF lens & 1.4TC to use as a lightweight option for me to use with the D500, and may then sell on my 150-600mm lens????
 
My D810 was relegated to landscapes only when I got the D500. It is a super camera, but getting the best out of the 36mpix sensor is tricky when you are chasing moving subjects.

I used the D810 for wildlife for 2 years and got some nice shots - as an all rounder it is good. I just found it tricky to get consistent results with wildlife.
 
Swanseajack said:
My D810 has just been sent off to the dealers for sale. Just wasn't using it after buying the D500, which I have put on 16k actuation's since purchasing in January 2017.... The D810 with the 36mp and 24mp crop mode is excellent, but for my arthritic fingers/thumbs I just find the joystick on the D500 so much easier to use for my 95% garden wildlife photography.... Not sure if I was seeing much of a difference between my previous 3 x D750's, D810 & the D500 noise wise for my use when I look back over my photos, but the DR on the FF cameras is obviously better. Perhaps filling the frame with the D500 is better with my lenses and bigger primes maybe would be better for cropping abilities with the FF cameras???......... Hope I don't regret it, but will keep an eye on the D760/D820 release and see if they come with a joystick.

I will probably buy a 300mm PF lens & 1.4TC to use as a lightweight option for me to use with the D500, and may then sell on my 150-600mm lens????
Click to expand...

Hi Simon,

I definitely recommend the 300mm PF. It's amazing how light it is and should help you out with your shoulder problems :)
 
wezza13 said:
Hi Simon,

I definitely recommend the 300mm PF. It's amazing how light it is and should help you out with your shoulder problems :)
Click to expand...

Me too, I have purchased a few new lenses this year and I can definitely say that the 300mm PF is my favourite at the moment. It basically sits on the D500 usually with a 1.4TC and is amazingly light and easy to handle as a combination.
I can only hope that Nikon have a go at producing a 400mm or even better a 500mm version in the PF format because either of those two would sell like hot cakes. Probably at a ridIculously high price though!!!
 
BigBudgie said:
I can only hope that Nikon have a go at producing a 400mm or even better a 500mm version in the PF format because either of those two would sell like hot cakes. Probably at a ridIculously high price though!!!
Click to expand...
They wouldn't sell like hot cakes. Look at the Canon 400mm f/4 DO. Brilliant lens, but £££.
 
Sparrows are great ... saw my first Tree Sparrows in years at RSPB Bempton Cliffs this week. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top