differences

Advantages of the Nikon D500

Report a correction
Snapsort is not aware of any important advantages of the Nikon D500 vs the Nikon D750.
Nikon D500 Learn more about
the Nikon D500

Advantages of the Nikon D750

Report a correction
Snapsort is not aware of any important advantages of the Nikon D750 vs the Nikon D500.
Nikon D750 Learn more about
the Nikon D750
vs

recommendations

Snapsort can't make a recommendation (yet) because it doesn't have enough data yet about the D500.

similarities

Compared to recent DSLRs

Common Strengths

Snapsort is not aware of any interesting strengths shared by these two products.

Common Weaknesses

Snapsort is not aware of any interesting weaknesses shared by these two products.

Compared to recent pro DSLRs

Common Strengths

Snapsort is not aware of any interesting strengths shared by these two products.

Common Weaknesses

Snapsort is not aware of any interesting weaknesses shared by these two products.

dxomark

DXOMark

appearance

Nikon D750 Nikon D500
Nikon D750
Nikon D750

discussion

Nikon D500
D500
Nikon

Report a correction
Nikon D750
D750
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 4 comments

Avatar for Clover Paws Cattery Clover Paws Cattery (8:39 AM, September 30, 2016)
After a lot of thought and research, I agree with you. I ended up choosing an old school D700 for now and I am eventually planning to purchase the D4s. I am extremely happy with the d700 and feel that the quality of the photos are superior to the D7100, despite the lower megapixels. My only argument is that it's very loud.
 
Avatar for AuxFawkes AuxFawkes (4:38 AM, September 30, 2016)
You can't change physics. A full-frame sensor is about 2.5x larger than a DX sensor and still gives you much more shallow depth of field for portrait work and will also still be be better for landscapes and prints due to the higher (albeit very slightly) resolution and dynamic range. Will a D500 take bad portraits? Of course not, it would be stupid to suggest so, but a D750 is still the better camera for portrait work, especially if you don't have any external flashes.
You can't go wrong with either one, but if you have more invested in DX lenses than FX, then maybe the D500 is the better option. If you have any real wide angles (non-DX), you're not taking full advantage of them if you don't go FX.
I went from a D7100 to a D750 and have zero regrets, it's a night and day difference. I will purchase a D500 as a secondary camera.
 
Avatar for Frank Nazario Frank Nazario (11:28 AM, February 01, 2016)
I am torn between a D7200 and this machine. Yes, I said D7200, The convenience of dual SD storage slots alone and the readily availability of the storage format not to mention the card readers is driving me to the crossroads. 24 against 20 yes there is a difference there. What I want to see is how dark can the D500 go with a fast lens and how that compares to the D7200... Remember the horror story Canonistas faced with the 50.6 megapixel FX monster they dished out... the noise levels of that camera are absolutely disastrous compared to previous Canon cameras or the top tier from Nikon.
FX is out of the question for me.
Go get a set of fast Sigma Art glass and you have the equivalent or even better glass than Nikon for a third of the price and performance that will have FX cameras sweating bullets.
I do know that noise is in big part the result of the glass you put in front of the sensor but still ... 8 frames against 10 ... hummm. 1/4000 against 1/8000 believe me what got frozen at 1/8k of a second WILL be frozen at 1/4k.
The camera is definitively a niche camera... the goodies of 4k in video (I've never done video with my DSLR) is not game changing for me. At the end image quality rules.
I want so see a comparison in real world circumstances of the D7200 and the D500.
 
Avatar for Clover Paws Cattery Clover Paws Cattery (9:40 AM, January 18, 2016)
Hmmm, I really can't wait to see how the D500 camera does for portraits. This camera is geared towards wildlife and sports. However, is there any reason why it wouldn't also take fantastic portraits? When I ask people about using this camera for portrait, I feel like their reasoning against it is basically that I just don't NEED all the D500 features for portrait. But when was having more features than you need a problem??? Because although I shoot more portrait, I also like to shoot all other things. I feel like D750 owners are a little sore that there's been a crop sensor camera made that might possibly outshine their FX camera in many ways. Some I know, will claim the D750 is better simply because it's FX, but FX really is only a little different from DX and not necessarily bad. And many are also saying the D500 is too expensive, but look at the specs! Nearly everything is HIGHER than this D750 FX camera! To me it makes scene that it would be price higher and seeing how it will be new on the shelves, I think the price is fine. I am upgrading from a D7100 and I am truly torn between the D500, D750, and D810.