D810 vs D500 high ISO performance

[kallisti]

Just got a D500 specifically wanting a crop body for telephoto. The marketing hype stressed the high ISO performance of the D500, but I thought it was only that--hype. Wasn't expecting the crop body to compare to the low light performance of a full frame sensor. I was wrong.

Two shots taken on a tripod. D810 vs D500. Both 1/10 sec @ f/4 and ISO 12,800. The D810 with a 24-70 at 45mm. The D500 with a 17-55 at 30mm.

D810

D500

I'm not sure these small files really highlight the difference adequately. It's pretty dramatic looking at the full size files (not pixel peeping, just looking at the full size images). The D500 is better than the D810 at high ISOs despite it being a crop sensor.

The two are different tools and they each have their own place, but this result surprised me somewhat.

 

[besler3035]

D500 is about 2 years newer than the D810, and is pretty much being promoted as a professional crop sensor body (with the price tag to go with it!). This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. The D810 should get an update in the next 12 months or so (to the D820 or whatever it's called), and I'm sure they'll put better technology in that one to at least match the D500's high ISO performance.

 

[Robotti]

Also, there is not as much difference in the photocell size as in some other cameras, because of the high resolution in D810 and relatively low resolution in D500.

 

[eric4]

Very interesting, I'm glad to see some real world comparisons like this. Glad to see the D500 faring well in the comparison too.

 

[Meister]

Did you shoot in jpeg?
How did post processing look?

I personaly trust objective comparisons and if you look at dpreview and dxomark, the D500 gets completely smoked by all Nikons fx bodies when it comes to lowlight performance.

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D500-sensor-review-Performance-redefined

 

[kallisti]

Did you shoot in jpeg?
How did post processing look?

I personaly trust objective comparisons and if you look at dpreview and dxomark, the D500 gets completely smoked by all Nikons fx bodies when it comes to lowlight performance.

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-D500-sensor-review-Performance-redefined

No, both shot in RAW.

Here are two more taken tonight. This time with the same lens (original Nikon 24-70 f/2.8). RAW, tripod, 1/60 sec, f/2.8, ISO 12,800. No noise correction in LR. The D810 at 50mm and the D500 at 31mm. The D500 image cropped slightly to make them close to the same FOV.

Again, web JPEGS are what they are and diminish the differences that are very obvious in the full size RAW files in LR. At best the two are equal, but the D500 is really a little cleaner. Not sure either are really optimal at ISO 12,800 and I would drop down to ISO 6400 unless the blur from the slower shutter speed outweighed the noise.

PM me if you would like to see the RAW files. The two bodies are different tools. I wanted the D500 as a backup body that also happened to have some different pros and cons compared to the D810. Was expecting its high ISO performance to be worse and was surprised that it is on par or perhaps slightly better.

D810

D500

 

[MiniD3]

Hi There,
Not much in pixel density but,
-The D500 is going to give you a lot of reach, crop factor a great asset with wild life photographers,
-The new AF system of the D500 is the latest
-The D500 is faring well in the ISO race, even for a DX, it performs extremely well
Enjoy!