Weekly Nikon news flash #373

A grey market Nikon D7200 camera is now selling for $749 - a new low price.

→ Sea&Sea released new MDX-D500 underwater housing for the Nikon D500 camera.

→ The new ‪Hasselblad‬ ‪X1D‬ medium format mirrorless camera uses a Nikon compatible hot-shoe:

"Its hot shoe is compatible with Nikon Speedlights and the camera can sync with flashes at its maximum shutter speed: 1/2000 sec."

Capture One 9.2 released
→ Capture One 9.2 ($269.95) released with support for the Nikon D500 (more info available here).

Zeiss Milvus 50mm f/2M ZF.2 lens for Nikon F tested at DxOMark.

Pinout geotag anti theft device for cameras
Pinout is a new geotag and anti-theft device for cameras.

Nikon D500 camera guts parts
Read about the The Right to Repair Coalition that could impact also Nikon products.

This entry was posted in Weekly Nikon News Flash and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Eric Calabros

    You already have right to repair your device. You just dont have access to spare parts. I don’t know how they gonna force companies to sell parts to…almost anybody! Its easy to tell businesses what to do, but in real world, doing those things is not always easy, or even financially doable.

    • Spy Black

      Isn’t that how Wall St took over the world?…

    • whisky

      the force part is easy, if they want to do business in that state.

    • Gregory Roane

      Hey, if they can make me, a 43 yo male, purchase insurance that covers any future hysterectomies or ovarian cancer that I may develop, making them make parts available to repair facilities should be a piece of cake.

    • Why would Nikon not want to sell spare parts? They can price them however they want to optimize revenue, so I would think they should be glad to sell.

      • Eric Calabros

        Its more complicated than that.

        • How so?

          • Eric Calabros

            Nikon is not Apple. Cupertino knows which one of its service center need which parts and when, then produce accordingly. There is no inventory. Nikon try to do same (everybody does), but they’re far from Apple level of efficiency and response time. Whith many many repair centers, they will have to reverse all this process of getting rid of inventory mess. in a collapsing market, that would be a painful reverse.
            Meanwhile, even “official” representative in my area doesn’t have enough Canon 70D mainboard, so owners have to wait for weeks. Go figure.

  • Spy Black

    Nice price on the D7200. I wonder if Nikon will ever follow up on this model line, what with the advent of the D500.

    • Hardcore_Fanboy

      I think that Nikon will release next model in next year 2Q (will be precise 2 years since d7200 release). there is many ways how to cripple that body and make “pros” still want d500 for higher price than better d7300 take example from now – d7200 vs d500 – “pros” have 100% conviction that D500 smokes d7200 in all departments, even thou in many reviews there are samples and conclusions that IQ and even high ISO preformance is so close that on a 200% zoom one can not tell a difference… and how we managed to lived without 10fps and ulimited buffer just 1/2 year ago- is still a mystery for all. so D500sales will not take a dent from its own d7300 competition, but if Canon 7D III can switch those “pro” “thinking”…. lets say – how we will live without 12fps? or maybe 5 million pushed/usless iso.

      • PhilK

        It’s not just speed and buffer.

        The AF is in a class by itself, period.

        The build quality is better, and should be better environmentally sealed as well.

        The ergonomics are better.

        Just a few of the more obvious bullet points.

        • Morris

          also the touch screen function looks like crap (not a full touch experience) that might become in 1-2 iterations

          • Dustin Hall

            I wouldn’t change anything about the touchscreen, because using it in menu’s or to change iso/ss/aperture is something I personally wouldn’t do, but I could see that being a big deal to other people. The touch screen is very responsive and works where it should, so what’s the problem?

            • Morris

              my point is not if i need it or not
              the touch experience is not as complete as every other touch experience, you can do something, but cant do something else,
              imho make it full or dont make it at all, they will ask big moneys for little advances , wait and see

            • Dustin Hall

              That’s the flaw in your logic, the touchscreen literally works for what most people would want to use it for. Enabling the touch interface in everything else is what the entry level market is for/cares about, and that is not the target market for this camera.

            • Morris

              it’s not a flaw in my logic
              it’s you trying to justify a product which came out crippled (another user comment)

              it is crippled because in this world all touch experiences are offered ‘larger’ ‘complete’

              offer it
              or dont offer it

              offering it crippled, and enance it complete in 1-2-3 hiterations, its the main non logical thing in here, and if it happens then you will see the non logic

            • Dustin Hall

              Correct, I use the D500. You couldn’t be more wrong, there is nothing crippled or incomplete. Thank you for suggesting you don’t own the camera, it makes your lack of understanding quite easy to understand. It’s a pro/enthusiast grade camera, and as such, your “sell the feature on the next one” logic doesn’t work since none of us even want to use it for those purposes. Get the D5500 if you want consumer grade features.

            • Morris

              u dont get the point (i can afford a fx, i have a dx) the d500 i wanted it but i changed mind -still nice machine, you keep defending

              first apple users said tablets dont need a camera because jobs said so, after 2 hiterations jobs changed mind, now ipads had a back camera (inferior to androids counterparts) all apple lovers jumped WOW A CAMERA (2 days ago it had no sense to have it, 1 day ago it was crippled but good enough, at the third hiterations, it will be wow, well) -thats the consumer perspective getting milked and accepting big companies squeezing


            • Dustin Hall

              Tablets and DSLR’s are completely different types of of products. The point is, the technology is already used in the way you want on entry-level products. It doesn’t have a place in pro/enthusiast cameras, and I wouldn’t use it even if the option were available. It has no place in Nikon’s menu system or in the use of changing manual settings. That won’t change, even if it were introduced, most pros/enthusiasts wouldn’t touch it.

          • Already a full experience on the very first iteration of touch screen on a Nikon DSLR (D5500). Why they chose to cripple it on their “flagship” DX remains a mystery to me.

            • Morris

              because they wanna squeeze on future iterations

            • whattheblazes

              Actually, the reason is quite simple. Why have a touch screen to access things like ISO, shutter speed, aperture etc., when there are external
              dials designed specifically for that purpose. Nikon has got the touch screen balance just right for a pro or enthusiast. As much as I like touch screens, especially for video, they will never be faster than accessing external buttons on the fly. Particularly when you apply it to stills photography. Nikon’s pro and semi-pro cameras have always been exceptional in this area. In fact, any camera with excellent button placement will out shine any touch screen, especially when making on the fly adjustments, whilst still looking through the
              view finder.

      • Eno

        I can spot the difference quite easily between the two cameras (the images are from Dpreview at ISO 12.800, NR off and resolution matched).

        • Spy Black

          Considering a new sensor with somewhat larger photosites and a new processor, while there certainly is a difference, it’s a rather small one. Progress, certainly, but I think this would be the last reason to consider a D500.

          • Eno

            I see half a stop difference between them, so I wouldn’t call that small. There is one stop between D750 and D7200 and D500 sits right in the middle. 🙂 https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7c71d51cdc02ff5ab44e48903db55746bec7483919db9de04e49b6441a386672.jpg

            • Captain Insane-O

              You’re crazy. It’s about a quarter stop better at most.

              Look at the fine detail images on dpr and you’ll see more pronounced.

              The d500 does have better colors than the d750 at high iso though.

              All the scientific websites that do quantitative analysis echo the quarter stop advantage over the d7200.

              I personally don’t shoot my d750 above 1600, nor my d5500 above 800 due to my own quality preferences. So the d500 and d7200 are tied, and actually the d7200 produces higher snr over the d500 under iso 2000.

              I lost all respect for those YouTubers who were raving about iso 100k results on the d500 when it has less SNR and DR than the cheaper D610 shot at its highest native iso and boosted to 100k. If you didn’t do it before, then why now on obvious lesser performing equipment. Cause Nikon told the FRO it was ok.

            • Eno

              The fact that I see D500 image quality behaving between D7200 and D750 (so, roughly half a stop difference) does not make me crazy, Captain Insane-O. You should revise your vocabulary!

            • Captain Insane-O

              The fact that you think its so close to FF performance when only marginally better than crop is what makes you delirious. Crazy might be a far stretch for a synonym of delirious, but it’s not that far.

            • Spy Black

              Certainly a good thing, but still not the main reason on deciding on a D500.

      • Hardcore_Fanboy

        that is what I am talking about (see post that answers my prevoius one) – no doubts in these “pros” conviction – and getting hostile when questioned (just like in a real religy). I did not say D500 is bad/worse than d7200 or something – I said specially “IQ and even high ISO preformance” is not suprassing, but matching old, cheap d7200 (look example – the result is negligable – if that is why you wet your pants from excitment about and comfort your self with “… and on top of that I have 1.6 gazzillion izos- MUAHAHA” – be my guest). so no – there is not and will be no logic why “pros” will crave d500 over d7200 or over d7X00, there fore Nikons D500 sales will not be affected by potentially better DX camera.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Sorry but body quality and ergonomics _are_ about as logical as you can get when you discuss pro usage.

          • Captain Insane-O

            To an extent yes. Someone who lives in a studio is not going to care as much as someone shooting penguins under water.

            The d7200 provides a lot of quality and control and can easily give you multiple bodies without draining your business account.

            Most pros are going to care more about making money. If the d500 doesn’t help them then some will be more economical. Just like so many use the d750 over the d4s. 60% cheaper helps out.

            Just because something is better, it doesn’t mean that the other isn’t good enough. D7200 has exceptional af and quality, even though the d500 is clearly better. The d750 clearly has a better sensor, but the d500’s is more than good enough. The d810 has 50% more pixels than the d750, but 24 is more than good enough.

            Otherwise they would be buying the D5, as it is by far built better, has true unlimited buffer with raw + raw file writing, has best high iso performance, and can capture 14 fps. But that $4,500 compromise is hard to over come.

            Life is about compromises, and legitimate business men and women will consider cost, especially when they have multiple bodies to purchase, with quality and features.

        • StevenS

          Everyone wants something for little money. Comparing individual specs. Sensor for sensor, etc. The d500 isn’t about just the sensor or just the fps, etc. It is the sum of all the parts that make it what it is. That includes many pluses and a few weaknesses. Nothing is perfect or why would they make new models? Tech marches on. If you have used a d300(s) the d500 embodies the spirit of the d300, only better in every aspect with the possible exception of battery life. It becomes intuitive and very responsive as you compose and expose. It takes less to get to a satisfactory exposure, from the meter to the af to the awb to the lag time to the working files in post. They just work up faster and get to where you want to with less effort. Sure the tech will trickle down – in bits and pieces.

          The camera is a solid, ergonomically designed piece that is easy to use for extended periods and is a joy to use. I also have a d7100 and while the body ergonomics are OK, the are not in the same league nor does is have the same feeling of rigidity in the hand.

          You get what you pay for.

          As a PS I cannot say enough about the accuracy and speed of the AF. No second guessing your capture once you familiarize yourself with it.

      • Allen_Wentz

        It is the pro _body_ that makes many of us want the D500. The D7200 body is pure consumer grade, a huge difference.

        Plus of course the spectacular AF of the D500.

        • Spy Black

          It really depends on what you’re doing with it. For certain types of shooting either camera will suffice.

    • Morris

      i think so, there is quite a lot to move from the D7200 to the D500, by the time the D7200 reaches the D500, a D500s (or m II or 510) will be out

  • That’s just amazing for the D7200. Though not as great in some performance marks, a better sensor than the new and fantastic D500. And at this price, almost a 1/3rd of the D500, a real bargain.

    When I have some extra bank, I’m definitely getting one for my walk-around DSLR and maybe even a backup camera. Doesn’t have the build quality of the D810 but can certainly do well in a pinch for many genres.

    • whisky

      “a better sensor” ???

      an absolute claim of this sort begs an explanation or shouldn’t be made at all. JMO.

      • Dustin Hall

        Agreed, aside from more megapixels (and by that, I mean not much), there’s really nothing in the D7200 that comes close to the D500’s sensor. For example, one look at ISO performance and the D7200 has lost.

        • HF
          • whisky

            at base ISO … i read that somewhere else too. but the D500’s sensor wasn’t designed to be optimal at base ISO.

            all this before we begin to weigh the pros and ons of pixel size. my point is that claims of “better” or “best” are always relative to purpose or function — and must be qualified accordingly or invite debate. JMO.

            • HF

              I compare measurements (S/N by DXO over ISO, for example, both identical) or images, like the dpreview comparison, which allows to compare equal settings, as close as possible. There the difference is marginal. However, as written above, the AF system is the thing to talk about here, in my opinion.

          • Dustin Hall

            Personally, I see a very noticeable difference between the images in that link. I would go as far as to say the picture from the D7200 is the worse of all 4 shown except for possibly the 7d my ii, which is very close to the 7200 in that test, but perhaps just a step behind.

            • HF

              Noticeable? I can’t see that. For me they look equal. Every difference one could guess or see could be solely due to raw converter demosaicing. DXO show exactly the same S/N ratio over ISO, too. If there were a noticeable difference it should be clearly measured. The 7dii has larger grain and much more color noise in the shadows. The Sony has a smoothed appearance probably due to more noise reduction. I think you wish to see a difference, which just isn’t there. Only DR is a tiny bit better at higher ISO according to the measurements.

            • Dustin Hall

              Take another look at the pictures. The difference is pretty apparent. I think you may be just not wanting to see the difference, but it certainly is there. Secondly, I would take anything DXO says with a grain of salt and just judge pictures for yourself.

              We are comparing relatively new cameras here, not something that is 10 years old vs something new, so you won’t see earth-shattering differences, but there certainly is no denying the difference is there.

            • HF

              Bill Claffs measurements go in the same direction. At 12800 ISO a PDR of 3.95 vs. 4.13. Nothing to see in real life images. Every difference could just be attributed to different NR baked in raw. It is good if it is apparent for you, for me I can’t really see a difference I would base a purchase decision upon. There are other factors making this camera a great addition.

            • Dustin Hall

              I would love to take a look at those comparisons as I, personally, haven’t seen an image comparison yet that I feel the D7200 surpasses or even matches the D500 in. I try to keep an open mind and compare the images for myself.

              As far as NR causing differences is concerned, that’s speculative. It could be true, or one just naturally performs better, which in my personal opinion, is more likely.

  • Juser ordered the Pinout, want me to let you know how it is once I got it?

    • Spy Black

      Yeah, you should report back, perhaps as a review here on NR. Looks like it could be handy in certain situations. Looks cumbersome however.

    • Yes please.

  • MB

    ‪Hasselblad‬ ‪medium format camera, first of a new Hassy mirrorless system, can use my Nikon speedlights, smaller, handier and roughly the same price as D5 … looks tempting … surprise, surprise…

  • Back to top