D500 vs D850?

JamesR: yeah that's pretty much sealed it for D500 for me.

Whilst I would absolutely LOVE to have the D850 on land, I think I can make do with some UWA lenses for landscape photography, as that's really all I need a full frame for.

I'm selling my rx100ii in case you're interested, haha

It's funny, in a sad way, I keep going back and forth about these. I've had my D850 since March 2nd and have yet to even open the box. It has sat in my camera safe (gun safe haha) untouched for 5 months plus.

The more I think about it, the more I am leaning to the D500, but I'm still on the fence! Ugh. Need to decide in the next month.

Happy that i decided a D500 for both, under and above water then it came out.
And a few weeks ago bought a used D750 for above....
Only because a wedding of a friend ;-))
Regards,
Wolfgang

I've had my D850 since March 2nd and have yet to even open the box. It has sat in my camera safe (gun safe haha) untouched for 5 months plus.

Seriously, I do think the D500 is a better camera for UW for a couple reasons. I'd still go for the D850 myself for certain reasons. Currently shooting D810 UW and love it.

If you're stuck with an extra D850 and nothing to do with it, I'd be happy to help you out there!

What are your reasons for the D850? Just wondering/looking for something that will help me decide.

I wish I had time for the upcoming mirrorless to come out and be proven, housing and such, but I dont.

Thanks,

What are your reasons for the D850? Just wondering/looking for something that will help me decide.

 

I wish I had time for the upcoming mirrorless to come out and be proven, housing and such, but I dont.

 

Thanks,

Well I haven't read through this thread, perhaps this has all been said but...

D500

1. Smaller, which translates to significant size/weight reduction in housings. Its under-appreciated but very important - it will handle better in and out of the water.

2. 10fps would come in very handy in some shooting situations - I wish I had that.

3. In a certain sense it has better magnification/DOF for macro - though one can crop a D850 file to nearly D500 dimensions, but it would change your shooting style.

4. Its much cheaper, as are some housings.

5. Rectilinear super wide lenses will perform better behind the same size dome. Soft corners are a real challenge.

6. If you prefer fisheyes, the Tokina 10-17mm is a DX gem that has no FX equivalent (perhaps the new 8-15mm + kenko TC).

7. It really is right up there in quality - I've shot it alongside my D810 topside and its brilliant, the price difference does not reflect an overall image quality difference. Better value for money.

Why I'd personally go D850:

1. I want the highest resolution possible - I've had my images blown up to full wall size (7+ meters across) for up-close viewing. Every pixel matters then. But honestly the 12mp from my old D700 is plenty of resolution for 99% of things.

2. I'm set with my full frame lens lineup. I'd have to buy new lenses (superwide zoom, 40mm macro as I love the 60mm view on FX).

3. Marginal edge in dynamic range (0.8 stop by DXO's measurements). It means nothing for 99.99% of people and situations, but I often push my camera's boundaries. I've managed some impressive high contrast shots with the D810, but I shoot some weird stuff.

4. I do love my 16-35mm on the D810 - its my go-to lens (but only behind Aquatica's 9.25" megadome). Perhaps the 10-24mm or some other lens on a D500 would perform as well or better but I don't really know (yes I'm sort-of contradicting #5 above... with a smaller dome D500 would win)

5. I shoot topside more than UW and would prefer the D850 there.

Mirrorless:

1. Hugely smaller & lighter. World of difference.

2. Come such a long way, with the right setup (quality body & lenses) most people would be hard pressed to tell the difference from a DSLR.

3. I generally tell people today that unless they know they want an SLR, if you have to ask yourself the question, just go mirrorless.

Hope that helps. Cheers,

Chris

Edit:

Oh and just looked at some of your work. Awesome stuff. I see you shoot some action sports too - I'd go for the D500 hands down for that.

D500 vs D850, DX vs. FX, the justifications and arguments always play out the same.

The true question is what you need all those pixels for from your camera.

Is it for making prints for the wall?

If truth be known, most of todays digital printers used by facilities that turn the image captured by your digital camera is printed at 90 ppi. Translated, an image from a Nikon D500, which produces a 5568 x 3712 size image at 300 ppi, will render a print (working with the printers full resolution) approximately 61 inches wide by 41 inches tall. For entertainment, even if a printer having a tighter pixel pattern of say 110 ppi will still render a 53.5 x 33.5 inch size print.

If you are in the business of making gallery wall prints larger than 5 feet across, than yes, more pixels are going to be desired.

Image usage in print publications like magazine, catalogs and brochures.

In the golden age of print magazine publication, the gold standard for an image to grace a cover or a two page spread needed to meet 300 dpi (240 dpi) resolving capabilities to work. Having worked directly on the creation (from conceptual layout to press) of multiple print ads for magazine publications, brochures, as well as a few catalogs with more than 80 to 90 pages each, I can tell you no commercial printer I know of is printing with even 240 dpi. More like the same used for creating your wall print, often times less than even that.

Web?

Most websites image area is 690 to 1024 pixels wide with a resolution of 72 to 73.58 ppi. For example, this image here (see below) only holds an image space of 600 wide x 400 pixels high with a resolution of 73 ppi.

If I were still shooting more topside commercial photography than I am now, oh yes I would be all over the D850. Namely because I know how art directors think more is better, even if the image itself doesnt really have it in the artistic/composition category.

The truth of the matter is not so much of a question as to what you need, but what you really feel you need to have.

Really good point there, Walt: "The truth of the matter is not so much of a question as to what you need, but what you really feel you need to have."

At the end of the day, you need to be really happy with what you have bought and not be thinking, if only....... So what you really feel you need is maybe more the issue than what you need.

Nice pic too!

Right on TimG! In world of underwater photography, top shelf camera systems is seldom a case of I got to have it for the work I do, but in all actuality case of I gotta have it because, because I really desire having one. In technical diving, see pretty much the same play out on rebreathers. Very few divers actually need these expensive pieces of equipment, but it hasn’t stopped many from jumping into it. Bottom line, it’s all a matter of what floats your boat. Like you said, if your happy with what you have at the end of the day, then you have what you need.

Oh and just looked at some of your work. Awesome stuff. I see you shoot some action sports too - I'd go for the D500 hands down for that.

Thanks for the complement. Fortunately, I have a D5 for sports and pretty much anything else I shoot topside, so the 850 or 500 would be used as a 2nd camera with a different lens/focal length.

I do have all FX glass, which is a small consideration. The $500 or so for a Tokina 10-17 doesn't even factor into my decision much at this level of spend.

You guys are 100% accurate on "need vs want." I don't personally need anything, it's just a hobby that occasionally makes me 1% of my investment back if I am lucky. I could be happy using a GoPro if I didn't have to edit video

Really good conversation in this thread. Thank you all for the great points to consider.

Curiously I bought a D5 for topside. I can’t tell you how much pleasure I get using that camera. I just love it. A rational decision to buy it? Ha!

Curiously I bought a D5 for topside. I can’t tell you how much pleasure I get using that camera. I just love it. A rational decision to buy it? Ha!

The first time I shot it I was blown away by how many more images were in perfect focus than when using my other or previous cameras (D700, D7000, D800, D810, etc). It was a shocking difference! A bit irrational? For sure! Regrets? Nope.

 

The first time I shot it I was blown away by how many more images were in perfect focus than when using my other or previous cameras (D700, D7000, D800, D810, etc). It was a shocking difference! A bit irrational? For sure! Regrets? Nope.

Hehehe, could not agree more! The darned thing is awesome!

I favour the D850. This is partly because I am invested in excellent FX lens options (Nikonos 13mm, Nauticam WACP, Zeiss corrector port, large domes etc) and partly because the camera is excellent.

When the D5 was announced, I got mine without hesitation and have used it extensively underwater. I shot the D500 a little underwater back in 2016 and while I thought it was very good, it was no D5. A friend who is a D500 user and lover tried the D5 at the time and just let out an expletive about the difference. However, at the start of this year I also got a D850. And that camera has really surprised me.

In the D4 and D800 era I shot the D800 quite a few times, but always wanted to go back to the D4. The D4 was way ahead at getting the shot. I also preferred the RAW files to the D800 for UW subjects. I expected a similar thing with the D5 and D850, but I found I was wrong. The D850 is inferior the D5 at getting the shot as others have said, but both are so good and the difference is definitely much less than with the D4 vs D800. Secondly, I prefer the the D850 raw files to the D5 for underwater subjects.

So I keep using the D850. I will still do some shoots with the D5, but I haven’t used it since the Galapagos in May and have done all keep wanting to take the D850. I do feel guilty having a D5 on the shelf - although it will be getting some frontline use again soon.

Alex

Alex

Thank you all for your insights!

I've been going back and forth between D500 and D850 for quite some time so all posts are of interest. Do you think there will be a shift with the release of the mirrorless Z6 and Z7?

Hi,
yes!
There will be plenty used DX and FX systems on the market ;-)))

I've started a new thread (good idea, Alex) for the Z6/Z7 discussion - they're sure to get lots of air time!

I decided to shoot my D850 for underwater since I have all the FX lenses, ports, etc already from the 800 and 810 I had previously...easier than trying to mess with buying and selling all kinds of stuff. I will probably not get to dive it until we get to Sipadan, but there's not many better places to enjoy a new camera so it'll be worth the wait.

Thanks to Jack at Optical Ocean Sales for taking the time to discuss pros and cons with me recently, super helpful as always!

JamesR: yeah that's pretty much sealed it for D500 for me.

 

Whilst I would absolutely LOVE to have the D850 on land, I think I can make do with some UWA lenses for landscape photography, as that's really all I need a full frame for.

 

I'm selling my rx100ii in case you're interested, haha

Your rx100 housing is still available for sale?