Nikon D750 Review

Image © NikonUSA

Background

The decision was made March 2018. The decision that I didn't want to admit.  My D700 was not cutting it anymore.  Before you go all crazy on me, hear me out.   The D700 is a great camera.  It was the camera that got me into my first FX size sensor.  It used the same batteries as my D300, had the same layout and could use the same battery grip.  Everything at the time made sense.

I needed better low light performance. The D700 was newer than the D300, has a larger sensor and similar performance.  It did everything I needed it to do at the time. It was a revelation and it served me well for many years.  It never had a hiccup, issue or failed me in any way mechanically.

Time moves on, D300 could use an upgrade and it was replaced with the D500.

Yeah....now we look at the D500 against the D700....and it doesn't sparkle as much as it used to.  IQ we are looking at something very comparable.  Let me repeat that a different way...the D500 APS-C (DX) sensor was performing on equal footing with the D700's FX size sensor.   On top of that, you also have newer imaging tech, better AF performance and more FPS for those times when you need that.

Still...that may not be enough to justify a D700 upgrade.  We head back to March 2018.   We are covering the Arnold Fitness Expo.  Hollywood Casino hosted boxing matches there.  Low and tricky lighting, a place where the D700 should excel.

To my surprise the D500 was out performing the D700 in those dark lighting conditions.  Why?  Metering.  It came down to metering.    The lights in the venue were often firing directly into the frame and the D700 was often fooled.   Depending on where you need to move and each scene being different from one part of the ring to the next, you need to be able to rely on the metering to help you out.  The D500 ate the D700's lunch here.

After that weekend event, I started looking at an upgrade. The logical place if I wanted to stay FX was the Nikon D750.

1/250  f/3.5   ISO 4000 @ 70mm
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC

Handling/Weight/Size

Size of the D750 is just about right for me.  It has a great grip and handles the larger lenses well.
The grip is deep and allows for a confident grip, even holding on to it one handed with a 70-200/2.8 lens attached.

It is a smidgen smaller in all dimensions than the D700, and it is lighter as well.

I'm still not a big fan of the was you switch about AF modes, having to press in the side button and then turn the dials.   I'd rather have the old 3 position switch, but I've gotten used to it since that is the system used on the Df and D500.

All the buttons feel quality.  I wish that the D750 had the thumb stick on the back for adjusting the AF point.

The rear LCD is great for reviewing images. It is also articulating so it can be tilted at an up and down angle.  Great for those times when you want to shoot at unconventional angles above or below you.

The shutter mechanism also sounds different than the older Nikon DLSRs I have.  It sounds and feels more dampened but has a bit of a "twang" sound to it.  You don't really notice it until you shoot in a very quite environment.

1/500   f/4   ISO 100
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G

Image Quality

While not a huge jump over the D700, the D750 metering is leaps above.  Shooting in difficult situations that are severely backlit or when light sources are coming directly into the camera, the D750 handles them more like the D500 does.  Thank you for that upgrade Nikon!

Base ISO is down to 100 now and the high ISO usability is now way higher.  You can get some great images at ISO 12,800 and 25,600.  ISO 6400 through is very clean in comparison to the D700.  I did not go over ISO 6400 on the older camera.

Dynamic range is also excellent and the files are rich in data so doing post processing has a lot of latitude, even in JPG files.

1/160   f/4   ISO 100  @ 52mm
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G

1/1000    f/4    ISO 12800 @ 200mm
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC

Auto Focus

AF here is basically the same as the D700 or D300.  That is not a bad thing.  The AF on those cameras is very good, predictable, rock solid.   It is not the phenom that is the D5/D500, but it is still going to get you where you need to be, just with a little more effort than the D500 requires.

One thing that I did notice is that I needed to auto focus fine tune every lens I put on the D750, except the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D.

The Nikon 35mm f/2, 24-70/2.8, Tamron 70-200/2.8VC all needed an adjustment.  Not much, between -2 and -5, but it needed it.

This is the first camera that I needed to use that feature.

In low light, the D750 also has an advantage over the D700.  It focus' more confidently in lower light, with less hesitation.  It also does not need as much light to AF.  Another great improvement over the older brother.

1/1000    f/4    ISO 100   @ 200mm
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC

Video

You have a basic implementation of 1080p video here.  Nothing surprising.  It is there when you need it.   The camera includes mic input and headphone monitoring jack.

1/500   f/4   ISO 100 @ 200mm
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC

Battery Life

Powered by the EN-EN15a battery, it is rated at around 1400 shots per charge.  Plenty enough for all day shooting if needed with normal use.  I'm sure it is less with a lot of chimping or using the Live View or recording video.  This camera is so power efficient, it will last for DAYS!!

Other Misc. Items of Note

There are no regrets on upgrading the D700 to the D750.   It is an upgrade in all the areas that I needed it to be.   It performs well and the battery performance is phenomenal.  It doesn't hurt that it can also use the same batteries as the D500.

Right now, I feel that the Nikon D750 is the best affordable FX camera in the lineup.  The only way you could do better is spend the extra money on a D4 or D5.  If you are Ok with DX size sensors and need just that bit more AF performance and faster burst rates (10fps), then the D500 is where you should look, even though it has slightly poorer battery performance.

Head To Head - Olympus EM1 Mark II Versus Nikon D500 Shooting Hockey

Hockey is arguably one of the hardest sports to photography because of the speed and unpredictability of the action.

I've always wanted to be able to photograph the Columbus Blue Jackets.  As luck would have it, Midwest Photo Exchange offered a photo workshop to shoot the Blue Jackets.

Before we get into the gear stuff, let me just take a minute to throw out some kudos to the following:

Midwest Photo crew Matt and Ken
Great hosts and supported the learning, being there to help with gear and shooting questions whenever someone needed it.  MPEX Website

Tim Neumann of Soft Light Studios
The main presenter and educator for this workshop.  He made sure that everyone was brought along on the journey.  We had some attendees that had very little photographic experience all the way through to professionals.  Tim was able to cover the basics of making the shooting experience a success for all involved.

Kyle Robertson, Columbus Dispatch Photographer
Kyle shared his expertise and experience shooting assignments and games at Nationwide Arena as well as other sporting events.  Kyle's Twitter Feed

Joshua, Columbus Blue Jackets Liason
Joshua was there for us throughout the event.  A great host, he also took us on an arena tour.

Gear For The Night
Nikon D500 / Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC
Olympus OMD EM1 Mark II / Olympus 40-150/2.8 PRO / MC-14 TC

Now let's get down to it.  You know you want to know all about it.

I'll help you out so you don't need to read through a lot of "junk".  I could pine on and on about all kinds of technical stuff.

Bottom line - I preferred shooting with the Nikon D500 over the EM1 Mk II.  The Nikon/Tamron combo just focused faster, stayed on target (I can't find an out of focus shot that was not my fault or was through the safety net).  The higher ISO was cleaner on the D500.


The Olympus may be suffering because I am still learning it's newer features and auto focus methods.
Still more testing to determine that.  Might also have been the lower light conditions gave the AF some issues.

Pub Match Images With the EM1 Mark II

1/1000, f/2.8, ISO 1600 @ 150mm

1/1000, f/3.2, ISO 1600 @ 150mm

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 1600 @ 150mm

1/1000, f/3.2, ISO 6400 @ 150mm

1/500, f/2.8, ISO 2500 @ 150mm

Pub Match with Nikon D500

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 2000 @ 200mm

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 1600 @ 200mm

1/1000, f/4, ISO 2500 @ 200mm

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 1600 @ 175mm

Battery Life

Each camera took about 1000 images over the course of the day, shooting 2 full hockey games.  A pub match early in the day as well as the Blue Jackets v Devils game at the end of the day.

Nikon battery was at 57%
Olympus battery was at 46%

Not bad, considering older mirrorless cameras, I probably would have gone through 2 or 3 batteries.  This includes any image review I did on the LCD.

Weight

I've never been one that was concerned about camera weight.  To be honest, while I noticed that the Nikon/Tamron combo were larger and heavier, handling between the 2 never really was improved or hampered by the weight or lack there of in either.

When in use, both cameras were supported by a Black Rapid strap.

CBJ versus NJ Devils - Olympus EM1 Mark II

1/640, f/4, ISO 1600 @ 155mm(MC-14)

1/320, f/2.8, ISO 1600 @ 150mm

1/1000, f/2.8, ISO 1600 @ 150mm

1/800, f/2.8, ISO 1000 @ 150mm

1/800, f/4, ISO 2500 @ 210mm (MC-14)

1/800, f/4, ISO 2500 @ 210mm (MC-14)

Nikon D500

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 1250 @ 200mm

1/1250, f/3.5, ISO 1100 @ 165mm

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 1000 @ 200mm

1/1000, f/3.5, ISO 1100 @ 200mm

1/1000, f/2.8, ISO 900 @ 200mm

1/1000, f/3.2, ISO 1250, @ 200mm

IBIS vs VC
Shutter speeds for the night were between 1/500 and 1/1000 when shooting action, so the IBIS/VC was never really used.  There were some shots that were more portrait-like, so the shutter speeds went down some and we can see there that the Olympus EM1.2 IBIS works very well.

End of the day, there were times when I was wanting some longer reach on the D500, so I tried using the 1.3x crop within the D500.  It worked rather well, provided you remember to keep the subject within the box boundary within the viewfinder.  Even without the in camera crop, the full DX files were great to use and could be cropped into a lot without losing IQ.

The Olympus high fps modes seemed like they would be a great asset.  I used the 15fps mechanical as well as the 60fps e-shutter.  Had some decent success there.  Tried AF in both single point and 3x3 box.  Also decent results there.  While initial AF acquisition is much improved over the EM1.1, it still was not close to the D500.  There were some initial frames that were out of focus and at times some frames in the middle of the burst would be slightly out of focus.

Again, as I said when we started off, shooting hockey is probably one of the most difficult action sports to shoot.  It may just be that this was a little too much for the EM1.2.

The confidence was just not as high with the Olympus kit as it was with the Nikon.

Shooting Conditions
We were able to pretty much shoot where ever we wanted to during the pub match.  We had access to the camera deck next to the broadcast video cameras as well as down in the put to shoot through the special ports in the glass.

During the NHL game, we were up in a special suite that was a little bit further back and more toward one corner.  A little but further away than earlier in the day, but a great vantage point to shoot from.

Just as an added bonus, here are a few images I got during the arena tour.

These were taken with the Olympus EM1 mark II and Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6

Nikon D500 Review - First Look

Image © NikonUSA

Background

It was a hard decision.

My D300 has served me well over the years.  Time and technology have shown it's age though in the IQ department though.  It still performs well in the AF department, being used by me for all my high speed action photography.

There have been other APS-C sensor Nikons that have come through the years, but none that matched the D300 for me.  The D7000 series was close, but did not feel right in my hand.  Then there were rumors of an impending D400....but nothing ever appeared.

Then, seemingly out of nowhere Nikon gave us the D500 along side of the D5 release.

As many who read this blog regularly, I also shoot with a Micro Four Thirds kit as well.  Olympus recently announced the EM1 Mk II.  They promise a lot from it.

The decision came down to a few things.

• As of this writing, the Nikon D500 is $300 cheaper than the EM1 Mk II price
• Olympus in the pre-release reviews have not really shown the EM 1.2 AF performance which they claim is rivaling that of other companies flagship DSLRs.
• Nikon's D500 AF performance and IQ have been front and center - it is a known and quantifiable entity that I can compare and contrast with my current gear.

Image © NikonUSA

Handling/Weight/Size

For a DSLR, the D500 is on the smaller side.  It is not a Canon SL1 size, but I placed it right next to the Nikon Df and it is roughly the same size.  The D500 is just every so slightly bigger and 100 grams.

The grip is deep and allows for a confident grip, even holding on to it one handed with a 70-200/3.8 lens attached.

I'm still not a big fan of the was you switch about AF modes, having to press in the side button and then turn the dials.   I'd rather have the old 3 position switch, but I'm sure I can make myself get used to it.

All the buttons feel quality.  The addition of the thumb stick on the back for adjusting the AF point is a great addition and it is sitting in just the right position for me.

The rear LCD is great for reviewing images as it is a touch screen and functions similar to how our phones work.  It is also articulating so it can be tilted at an up and down angle.  Nikon also included touch to focus and touch to actuate the shutter features to the rear LCD as well.   This is a welcome feature as I have grown used to it with the Olympus cameras I use.  The AF is still a slower contrast detect only method, but seems much snappier than the past iterations.  The Olympus implementation is still quicker, but good to see Nikon moving in this direction.

The shutter mechanism also sounds different than the older Nikon DLSRs I have.  It sounds and feels more dampened.

Image Quality

There is a big upgrade here when looking at the D500 against the D300.  My ceiling for the D300 has been ISO 1600.  Even that, the output can be mushy and low in detail.  The micro 4/3 cameras of today, in comparison, are usable up through ISO 6400.

The D500 changes all that.  Base ISO is down to 100 now and the high ISO usability is now way higher.  I was getting some great images at ISO 12,800 and 25,600.  ISO 6400 is very clean.  I should not have been surprised because I've always thought Nikon did a great job in processing high ISO images.

Dynamic range is also excellent and the files are rich in data so doing post processing has a lot of latitude, even in JPG files.

Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC
ISO 100, 1/1250, f/4 @ 200mm

Tamron 70-200/2.8
ISO 100, 1/1250, f/4 @ 200mm

Tamron 70-200/2.8
ISO 200, 1/2000, f/4 @ 200mm (heavily cropped)

Auto Focus

This is where I was completely blown away.

Not only do you have a ton of options, but the speed at which the D500 locks on is right there with the AF speed of the micro four thirds cameras.  That is really no shocker, though...what will get you amazed is the AF-C performance.

I went out and took pictures of 2 smaller dogs playing, and by playing I mean they were wrestling around.   The only images that were out of focus were the ones that I just could not physically keep up!

These dogs were rolling and heads flashing about...and the D500 was able to give me an unbelievable keeper rate.

My issue now is trying to learn all the AF modes and when best to use them.  All that I had heard in the reviews I have found to be very true!

Auto Focus set to AF-C d25 mode, continuous high release, release priority.  Did my best to keep the center point on the dogs.  The D500 and Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC did the rest!!

Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC
ISO 200, 1/3200, f/2.8 @ 82mm

Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC
ISO 200, 1/2500, f/2.8 @ 70mm

Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC
ISO 800, 1/2500, f/4 @ 70mm

Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC
ISO 800, 1/3200, f/4 @ 100mm

Video

4k video capable here.  I'm new to video, so I will not get too much into this and this is my first Nikon with video recording capabilities.  There are mic in and audio out for monitoring available, which is great.  According to the manual, the bitrate is 144Mbps for 4k.

Battery Life

Powered by the EN-EN15 battery, it is rated at around 1400 shots per charge.  Plenty enough for all day shooting if needed with normal use.  I'm sure it is less with a lot of chimping or using the Live View or recording video.

Other Misc. Items of Note

Bottom Line:  The Nikon D500 is probably the most responsive camera I have ever used as of the date of this writing.  It just does what it does and with seeming ease.

I use a Black Rapid strap and I did notice that the tripod socket does not seem to be as deep as the older Nikon cameras.  When attaching the Black Rapid connector to the tripod socket, the rubber piece that sits between the camera and the adapter never really cinches down.  It appears to work OK, but I think I might get some thicker rubber washers to use for that added security.

Here is a link to the Nikon USA D500 webpage for all the specs and what not.

Going to continue shooting with the D500, throw on a prime - maybe the nifty fifty or perhaps see how it deals with the Nikon 24-70/2.8.  Look for a follow up review in the weeks to come!