Nikon D5 - Why so few discussions about it?

Why so few discussions about the D5?


  • Total voters
    190
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,117
Location
New York State
The real point is to stop chasing "a better camera" but to equip yourself with one which encourages (or even forces!) you to push yourself beyond what you thought were your capabilities; and to explore avenues which you never have before; then that machine is the right camera for the moment.

Being a distinctly irresponsible individual, I never shop based on price but only on desirability (and on what I manage to persuade myself to be essential need) and find a way to pay for it later.
However, I do have a life-long reputation for being a decidedly bad influence . . . .
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,951
Location
Chicago
Which 200-400mm Nikkor do you have —and how are you processing your NEFs?

I ask because I have discovered that if you allow ACR (or Lr) to apply its Lens Correction to this lens, it changes the image completely and not just the geometry. Micro-contrast is destroyed, skies become flat and colourless, colours lose contrast and saturation, shadows lose texture and the whole image dies.

Try editing a photograph to its optimal state with Lens correction turned OFF; then turn it on and watch your image die on the spot!

I have no idea why this happens with the 200-400mm f/4 VR because I have not seen this happen with any of my other Nikkors but using that ACR Lens Correction totally destroys the superb quality which that lens is capable of delivering.

I also wonder if this only happens when this combination of lens and processing is used on photographs shot with a D5 but I haven't tested it yet with shots taken on my D3S.

I have read many reports by people who complain about lack of image quality with the 200-400 and have never understood their complaints but just assumed that I had been lucky and bought a "good" copy of this lens. Now I am wondering if they are applying Lens Correction automatically and by default to all of their images?

I don't have any of the other ultra-tele zooms, nor do I have a 400, 500 or 600mm prime to test, but would be most interested if anyone who does have one of those lenses could test and compare the results that they get when applying automatic lens correction in either of the current versions of ACR or Lr (they both use the same engine) and when they turn Automatic Lens Correction OFF.

I would apply corrections before PS or LR to raw image.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,117
Location
New York State
I was actually talking about applying Lens Corrections to RAW nefs in ACR in the piece which you quoted.

I frequently either throttle the lens and vignetting corrections back or I zero them out entirely.
It's a judgement which I make by eye, based on the subject matter, because the geometry of the rendering may not be that important while micro-contrast may be key.

I have the 200-400 VR (previous version) and I find that my images are crisper and cleaner with both vignetting and Lens corrections turned off.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
173
I can go with a D4s now to save money but we are talking £2700 for the D4s here in the U.K. and £3800 for a used D5 with XQD. Is the difference worth it? I’d probably have to answer that but I wanted your opinion on how big of a difference that was for you in improvements. I’m a former D3s owner but never delved into the D4* range.

The D4s should be fantastic and I thought if I can save some cash and apply it towards maybe a printer or something else it might make it all worth it. I’ve recently come across work that justifies a D* purchase. Then again, drool sets in on the latest and greatest D5 which looks like an outstanding option to my D810.

Thoughts?
Having had my D5 a bit longer, and just recently had time to get the D4s sold, I still think my original reasoning holds. The grip was better formed for mye hand on the D4s, and I would be willing to break someone at Nikon HQ to get the D4s (and prior) way or doing zoom on the screen back. The D5's use of a touch screen comes off as very half baked.

If I was in a position of coming from a smaller body and wanted to move up, and had put thought into it (my upgrade to the D5 was done on a whim), and I wasn't in a position that money was readily available for a new D5 with money to spare, then the D4s is a better camera. The D5 does have an edge with autofocus, but all other things (for me) are very incremental, and the screen and halfbaked touch stuff is a huge step back.

My two cents.

-A
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
882
Location
St. Louis
Real Name
Mike
Having had my D5 a bit longer, and just recently had time to get the D4s sold, I still think my original reasoning holds. The grip was better formed for mye hand on the D4s, and I would be willing to break someone at Nikon HQ to get the D4s (and prior) way or doing zoom on the screen back. The D5's use of a touch screen comes off as very half baked.

If I was in a position of coming from a smaller body and wanted to move up, and had put thought into it (my upgrade to the D5 was done on a whim), and I wasn't in a position that money was readily available for a new D5 with money to spare, then the D4s is a better camera. The D5 does have an edge with autofocus, but all other things (for me) are very incremental, and the screen and halfbaked touch stuff is a huge step back.

My two cents.

-A
Thanks for the response. I did end up going with a D4s for £2500. Only 20k-ish shutter clicks on it. What has stood out for me after using it a bit are the pictures it produces. I noticed this just shooting in jpeg. Colours and rendition are very noticeable. It’s pleasing to the eye. I just can’t crop to the degree of a D810 but I’m impressed with how it shoots from iso 100 through to 6400 and even 12K.

I would have opted for a D5 but it’s cost is very prohibitive when I can own a 2nd body, or even a 3rd if I paid full retail.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,117
Location
New York State
I have a different reaction.

Now that I have a D5 (but unfortunately only one of them), I find myself changing lenses instead of using my back-up camera. On a recent expedition, I shot 8750 frames on the D5 and only 125 shots on my previously much loved D3S.

I don't understand the complaints about the touch-screen on the D5 because I love it — especially for it's clarity and because it makes it so easy to change camera and menu settings.

I really think that it is just a matter of learning to use the rear screen to its best advantage but it does make it difficult (and exasperating!) when one has to switch to an earlier body which has a back-screen which behaves differently.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
882
Location
St. Louis
Real Name
Mike
I have a different reaction.

Now that I have a D5 (but unfortunately only one of them), I find myself changing lenses instead of using my back-up camera. On a recent expedition, I shot 8750 frames on the D5 and only 125 shots on my previously much loved D3S.

I don't understand the complaints about the touch-screen on the D5 because I love it — especially for it's clarity and because it makes it so easy to change camera and menu settings.

I really think that it is just a matter of learning to use the rear screen to its best advantage but it does make it difficult (and exasperating!) when one has to switch to an earlier body which has a back-screen which behaves differently.
I had a dilemma with all of this when I went from a D750 to D810. The hunting the D810 likes to do in lower light really annoyed me. I thought, what should I do now. The D810 was to be my all around camera. Not possible really when I want to do low light photography.

I’m not a resolution snob but the D810 files look great. There’s no denying it.

The D750 was put to the for sale bin because of about 3 or 4 areas the D810 was better at, at least for me. But after thinking about all of it again I could live with those for better lower light focus.

But I stuck with the D810 and then bought the D4s. I saved a lot of money. What’s 4mpix? I don’t know but I like the D5. It is calling me. It can do everything I want except easily allow me to download the photos to an iPad. I could use a USB cable so there is a work around. The D5 is lighter. the D5 has a touchscreen which is useful to chimp at photos. I still have envy.

I thought I was good with the D810 and D4s but the D810 in lower light is frustrating. What about the D850? Its only one camera and it’s no full size D4s or D5. After having a D3s in the past and now having a D4s, the D850 can do a lot but it will not replace the feeling you get with those camera bodies.

What if I changed it up to the D750 and D5. The D750 could handle my general photography and be a good travel body (due to its size). But then I have to spend a lot more money. The real annoying thing is, how will I handle one body with a touch screen and one without? I could live with it but I want 2 more consistent cameras.

Maybe I just need to go with the D850. It probably does everything I want minus the higher FPS. I’m splitting hairs here but there is an annoying feeling one gets when different camera bodies do not match features or dials or settings. The D5 is good but not sure I want to drop that cash on something that is missing something the D750 has which is wireless. For that price I expect that feature.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,117
Location
New York State
>>>there is an annoying feeling one gets when different camera bodies do not match features or dials or settings.>>>>

That is my problem too — and is why I really do want a second D5!

Nikon do make a WiFi module for the D5 — but at one hell of a price!
:(

I do have WiFi when I need it: mine is called CamRanger.
CamRanger can drive the D5 from an iPad or an iPhone; and download the resulting images directly to those devices.

Personally, I normally prefer shoot full FX-size 14-bit RAW and to edit my images (and down-size them too) before I share them with anyone else so WiFi is not that important most of the time.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
882
Location
St. Louis
Real Name
Mike
>>>there is an annoying feeling one gets when different camera bodies do not match features or dials or settings.>>>>

That is my problem too — and is why I really do want a second D5!

Nikon do make a WiFi module for the D5 — but at one hell of a price!
:(

I do have WiFi when I need it: mine is called CamRanger.
CamRanger can drive the D5 from an iPad or an iPhone; and download the resulting images directly to those devices.

Personally, I normally prefer shoot full FX-size 14-bit RAW and to edit my images (and down-size them too) before I share them with anyone else so WiFi is not that important most of the time.
Yes, a 2nd D5. My problems of consistency solved.

I like to edit files on LRCC on the iPad. It’s just a chance to get a first pass and the. It uploads changes to the Cloud for download on the computer. I like raw too but I’ve become a fan of LR on the iPad as an additional tool.

Regarding the wireless module, that’s the WT-6 and yes, it is very expensive....but cheaper than the D850 battery grip, charger and battery combo so I shouldn’t complain.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,245
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
I had a dilemma with all of this when I went from a D750 to D810. The hunting the D810 likes to do in lower light really annoyed me. I thought, what should I do now. The D810 was to be my all around camera. Not possible really when I want to do low light photography.

I’m not a resolution snob but the D810 files look great. There’s no denying it.

The D750 was put to the for sale bin because of about 3 or 4 areas the D810 was better at, at least for me. But after thinking about all of it again I could live with those for better lower light focus.

But I stuck with the D810 and then bought the D4s. I saved a lot of money. What’s 4mpix? I don’t know but I like the D5. It is calling me. It can do everything I want except easily allow me to download the photos to an iPad. I could use a USB cable so there is a work around. The D5 is lighter. the D5 has a touchscreen which is useful to chimp at photos. I still have envy.

I thought I was good with the D810 and D4s but the D810 in lower light is frustrating. What about the D850? Its only one camera and it’s no full size D4s or D5. After having a D3s in the past and now having a D4s, the D850 can do a lot but it will not replace the feeling you get with those camera bodies.

What if I changed it up to the D750 and D5. The D750 could handle my general photography and be a good travel body (due to its size). But then I have to spend a lot more money. The real annoying thing is, how will I handle one body with a touch screen and one without? I could live with it but I want 2 more consistent cameras.

Maybe I just need to go with the D850. It probably does everything I want minus the higher FPS. I’m splitting hairs here but there is an annoying feeling one gets when different camera bodies do not match features or dials or settings. The D5 is good but not sure I want to drop that cash on something that is missing something the D750 has which is wireless. For that price I expect that feature.
The d850 is not even close to the D5 in AF and ISO
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
4,666
Location
USA-Today
I think everyone would have a D5 , the latest tech and all, if there was no high price tag attached to it. If $$ is not an issue, then I am sure many would purchase one, but unless you are selling images, then other bodies will do it well. As in the end, what do we all do with all the images we shoot? If we do not sell them, then we Store them until?
but its sure fun to get great images that is for sure.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2017
Messages
1,281
Location
Central Ohio
Real Name
Andrew
I don't have a D5 because the D500 does everything I need, plus I like having the field of view the APS-C sensor gives me. If like to use aD5 some day, perhaps rent one... But I fear where that may take me. Lol.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
960
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
I don't have a D5 because the D500 does everything I need, plus I like having the field of view the APS-C sensor gives me. If like to use aD5 some day, perhaps rent one... But I fear where that may take me. Lol.
Yeah, I really like the additional reach I get from the APS-C sensor. It makes the 70-200 much more useful, and the 300/2.8 ends up giving me 450mm of reach (600+ with a 1.4x TC on it).

The only time I have ever been shooting with it and wished for better ISO performance was shooting race cars in the near pitch black, where I was at 6400 and 12800. It got pretty grainy at 12800 and I know the D5 would be better there. But other than that, the D500 is so good.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom