I got my Nikon D5 a week and a half ago and have been itching to try it out on some real world wildlife photography, but this time of year is tough for wildlife where I live and also the weather here has been insanely difficult the last week or so. This has really hampered my chances to try and get some photos with this new camera.
Let me just say something, I love my Nikon D4s so much, it will be hard for anything to replace it in my heart. My D4s “gets me the shots” in all kinds of situations, the quality of the pixels are absolutely amazing and apart from the elusive megapixels chase (16.2 MP), I probably don’t have a good reason to seek out a new camera. So why did I buy the D5? Tough question really, one answer is that in my mind I have always wanted one, but then there will be the Nikon D500 which is looking awesome and way more affordable, why not just that camera? I mean the questions could go on and on, I thought about the D500 seriously and still do, but I am so used to where my dials are and the size and feel of a Nikon PRO body that it is really hard for me to change. I have tried it before and lost precious shots because I fumbled with the camera settings and dials on the smaller camera bodies.
So back to the “why buy the D5” question, I had a Nikon D3X a few years ago, it was a hit and miss camera, but boy, when it hit, it hit and the photos were awesome and the cropping ability was amazing, so I think my experience with the files from the D3X and the cropping ability of the D3X heavily influenced me. Also another of my most basic answers to this question would be, the new focusing features and the new technology and mega pixels of this camera might help in the ever elusive chase for better photos, not that a camera does all that, but it can help. Ultimately I had hoped that Nikon had taken my D4s, added that perfect mega pixel range for me, improved low-light high ISO capability and for an even better “no miss”, more accurate autofocusing system. I had also hoped for more focus area coverage, that was my initial hope for the D5. Did the D5 accomplish all of this, I honestly don’t know yet, it is too early to judge at the moment, as I just don’t have the experience with this camera yet to say one way or the other.
As you can see by two of the above sample photos (snow ones), the weather was difficult, but I love the photos and I don’t often see black bears in snow. These end up being mood photos, but processed nicely, they are good enough photos to print for me.
Here is a 100% view of one of the 1st processed photo in the article:
Nasim is the king of technical articles and reviews, so I am not going to attempt any of that here. What I can do is offer some first hands-on experience, thoughts and some initial (my first) real-world sample images with this camera. Now I didn’t try to push ISO’s way too high, because my wildlife opportunities are limited and I can’t afford to throw away possible keepers for an ISO exercise. So these images are actual attempts to get keeper quality photos.
Let’s take a look at some sample images without any post-processing.
Here are some sample images. They have not been adjusted in any way, just brought into Photoshop and saved as a JPEG file. Not sure if this will be an accurate reflection of the original file, as the website does some additional image processing and compression as I upload files – Nasim tells me that the image quality should not be impacted, since the images are compressed using JPEGMini.
This first photo is at 10,000 ISO, higher ISO than I have ever tried to create a keeper photo from, but as mentioned in previous articles, I have tight tolerances on what I perceive as noise in my photos. It was photographed late evening, just before dusk in very overcast setting, very dark feel to the light.
Here is the same photo at 100 percent, no processing or adjustments from the RAW file, whatsoever:
Here is a 6400 ISO image taken in what I would consider really poor lighting conditions, the sky got thick with heavy clouds at dusk making it very low shooting light:
And the above 6400 ISO image at 100 percent crop:
Below is a 2200 ISO sample image, overcast but even low light weather condition:
Here is that 2200 ISO sample image at 100 percent – untouched:
Below is a 1000 ISO sample image, again overcast but fairly even low light weather conditions:
Here is the photo at 100 percent untouched:
One of the things Nasim told me, is that I shouldn’t compare my D4s images at 100% view to the D5 images at 100% view, because of the megapixel difference. If I wanted to compare the D5 images, I should down sample to match the D4s size, for a more accurate comparison.
I have to tell you, my initial D5 images were not what I had hoped for. There was a bit of softness to the images that kind of reminded me of my D800 images, maybe this is due to the larger megapixel count, that images at that size have that look. But there are several things I have not been able to do which might void that statement – I have not had a chance (because of the weather) to fine tune my lenses for the D5, and of course this being my very first images, perhaps it just didn’t happen at that moment.
Since those first photos, I have had some better opportunities and my gut-feeling is that the Nikon D5 is going to produce stunning images and will perform remarkably well at higher ISO ranges than my D4s. I think I will be able to choose a higher ISO maximum than I had for my D4s which of course gives me more shooting opportunities. The damn thing also autofocuses with a snap like instantaneous click, its instant and could focus in almost dark-like conditions. For me (remember it is early, only 1 week with the D5), I feel there will still be a time that the D4s will take priority over the D5, and I will have a hard time explaining this statement. It has to do with the look the D4s images produces and the crispness of the edges of the eyes of the animals, maybe its a perfect marriage of pixels to sensor size, I don’t know. On the other hand, having those extra megapixels to crop on the D5 sure is nice, I could crop a horizontally framed photo into a portrait photo and still have 300 dpi for that crop. I noticed the average file size of a D5 raw NEF file was approximately 24 MB to 28 MB and it adds up when shooting at 11 frames per sec, I actually filled up a 32 GB XQD card in one short session and I will probably have to evaluate my storage needs.
This article was really just about sharing some real-world Nikon D5 images – not perfect conditions, not horrible conditions, but the kind of conditions I often find myself in when shooting some of the wildlife I like to photograph. I think more time with this beast of a camera is what is needed for me, but it is not a bad start. Wildlife doesn’t show just so I can evaluate a new camera :) I wish it did – hehe.
I am going to leave you with this 8,000 ISO processed image:
Like I’ve said earlier I have a low tolerance for noise in my images and my self-imposed limits were low for the D4s compared to other photographers I know. Generally, I kept my ISO max at around 3200 occasionally going to 4000, but this D5 image at 8000 ISO is a keeper photo for me and already shows me signs of being able to increase my ISO max with the D5. This will be very helpful in low-light conditions, like being inside a forested area amongst the trees where bears live :)
I am sure Nasim will write a very technical and detailed articles on the D5. Take this article, as a very initial, first-hand experience with some sample photos from a D5.
ADDED (edit) TO ARTICLE 4-10-2016
I wanted to illustrate with the example below, the ability to obtain a portrait crop from a landscape image due to higher mega pixel count available, something I always wished I could do with my D4s but didn’t have the number of pixels required at a reasonable (300+) DPI.
1st image shows the original photo, not processed at all, which to me was a non keeper because the cubs were distracted and to me didn’t add to the story of the image. However I really liked the mood and the pose of the adult bear and hence tried my 1st landscape to portrait crop since my D3x days.
This second image shows the potential of what is possible and is now a new ability in my kit due to the mega pixel count of the D5. It also shows the D5 autofocus system performed remarkably well, maintaining focus of an approaching subject while it was snowing heavily.
Lastly, on these two newly added photos to this article, the above photo is a keeper photo for me at 5600 ISO. To date I am yet to have a keeper photo at that ISO setting for the D4s.
Finally, just so you can see the above photo quality at 100 percent – below
Get out there and get into it – photography is an experience!
Regards,
Robert Andersen
Being a new D5 owner I couldn’t resist giving my 2 cents worth. I got my D5 about a week ago and have shot a track meet in late afternoon, a baseball game in the afternoon noon and another baseball game at dusk and under the lights. I own a D810 and a D7100 and neither of these fine cameras would have handled these challenging conditions well. The D5’s autofocus, speed and ability to deliver good photographs in low light blew me away. Most impressive to me is the improved autofocus and ability to track moving subjects while maintaining focus at bursts of ten or more shots per second. I was able to get great shots of multiple hurdlers and runners while maintaining spot on focus. My low light pictures of batters and fast action on the bases and at the plate were of high quality as well. How about quality at low ISO? Based on what I have taken thus far, I have no complaints. I would expect my D810 may do a better job with landscapes in good light and that is great as I will keep and enjoy both cameras.
Hi Dave
Is there a link where we can see your D5 pics (exif included) ?
regards
Rob,
Thank you very much indeed for once again freely sharing your wonderful images and experiences with us.
Just in case this is of any use to you… I’ve found that the Nikon D3 and D4 series of sensors, and their Nikon RAW converter software, use unnecessarily aggressive “High ISO noise reduction” when left at their default setting “Normal”. I’ve set my cameras to their “Low” option because I’ve found this to be a much better tradeoff between noise and smearing of fine detail for the vast majority of my varied low-light photography. This “Low” setting has worked especially well when the Picture Control Sharpening level has been set to either “2” or “Auto”, which is not the default value for most of them.
Kindest regards,
Pete
Hi Robert
I always look forward to your articles, you tell it how it was, warts and all. You are always a reliable source of real world wildlife shooting at the limits of user conditions where we need the feedback from, not from a studio or sports field like most. The same goes for your lens articles. A really informative and useful article, thanks.
The practitioners at the extreme end of wildlife shooting and associated expensive equipment are both comparatively few in number and in the main reticent to expose themselves to the snapping horde. I appreciate you doing it for us.
I can see you need a thick skin and your patience is admirable. It amazes me how many post comments here on really stupid comparisons to D800/D750/micro 4/3 etc who obviously have no experience of field conditions or the FX pro bodies. Please don’t let them put you off.
I look forward to your next one.
Thanks
G’Day Peter
Thanks for the kind words, I am both humbled and encouraged by this positive feedback – I try my best to be as honest as I can be, exactly as it happened for me – I didn’t try to pick light that favored higher ISO, I didn’t try to pick the best of the best of the best so to speak – I went out there once or twice with the D5 as I would have with my D4 expecting to get results – So its as real world for me as it gets – you essentially experience my first experience :)
I don’t mind tough feedback, I often learn from it – just wish it wouldn’t get personal and all about money – thanks again mate
Rob
It would be great to see what results you would get photographing wildlife in jungle conditions in Costa Rica.
If you go there with your D5 and 600mm, and a guy with a tiny camera goes by and says “You sad little man!”, it is just a friendly greeting. You can reply “Yo AlphaWhiskey! How’s it goin’? “.
Hello Paglue
A 600mm probably wouldn’t work in the jungle environment, it would probably be the 70-200 or something like that and I would probably just reply – G’Day Mate, its my usual greeting to everyone
Rob
Robert,
I just wanted to make a comment to as to your photos and so many reply that I see here. Somehow I think we are all missing the point, the replies to your pictures are so technical I wonder now just what photography is all about. I have a Nikon D4S, one Nikon lens (28-300mm) and seven Zeiss lenses, and over the years I have had so much enjoyment shooting in something like 36 countries that I worked and or vacationed in. For sure it was never with just the D4S, but you get the point. For me all this pixel crap, cropping and so on, never really made a lot of difference, it’s what I saw through the view finder, and that was all that mattered to me. Why do I own a D4S, well I tell you, it’s rock solid, try and take a Sony out into the field where it goes from -35 to +50 degC in Dubai, and hey I can get 10,000 shots with just three batteries and never pack a charger. That is why we pay the price for a PRO body, which is what all these pixel peepers and technical guys just don’t understand. It’s all about taking pictures and having fun, why do we miss so much, maybe should spend some money on a photo tour instead of wondering what gear to buy. The pictures you shot were great and maybe down the line if I see more images of this quality I will buy a D5, maybe one for my wife and kids also haha, but for sure it won’t be based on all this techno pixel crap. The bottom line is you should put your money into the glass, camera bodies will come and go. My wife is in Singapore today and she ask me if I need anything , so I say yes I want a Nikon 24mm / f1.4, hmm, for sure I will have fun with that, maybe a D5 down the road, who knows… Anyway, my two thoughts worth, take care and keep up the good work… hey Canadian also Kano…
Hello Philip
Thanks – its because they did miss the point, too concerned about the price of the camera, which I understand, but the price of a camera should not be the reason not to post something, I have thick skin. The D4s is rock solid, a workhorse of reliability, I realize by reading the comments that some of these people couldn’t possibly have tried to do some of this stuff, there are many reasons for owning a pro body (specs) camera – from ruggedness to weather sealing to fast accurate auto focus to big buffers to frames per second to high ISO and Low Noise and so many other features, each of which helps get the shot the first time. The two main reasons I bought the D5 were, I needed a secondary camera (always travel with two) and I have always wished my D4s had just a few more mega pixels. I actually thought about bypassing the D5 and jumping to the D500 as a backup camera, but there are a few reasons I didn’t do that.
Thanks mate and just remember to have fun when you go out there – safe travels mate!
Rob
Hi Robert,
Curious about this statement:
“I actually thought about bypassing the D5 and jumping to the D500 as a backup camera, but there are a few reasons I didn’t do that.”
What are those reasons? I think I know, but would like to hear it from the source. BTW, hope you were able to checkout Brad Hill’s site and thoughts on the D5. He is enjoying his.
Thanks,
Mac
Hey Mac
Sorry for slow reply – got busy
One reason was cost, 2nd reason was apart from megapixels I am really, really, really happy with my D4s for wildlife photography, so I wasn’t really confident the D5 could be better (ie: a bird in hand is better than two in the bush thing). 3rd reason was the need for a backup camera when travelling, I have a D800 but it has less than 1500 shutter count because I just don’t like the images from it. This meant I really did need to find a 2nd camera body, only choices for me were (D5 or D500) if I was going to spend the money anyway.
If, I was mostly buying a backup camera, the D500 would have been a good compromise because of the crop factor, this might help me when travelling with limited backpack space and maybe negate having to bring multiple lenses. It is never going to be as good in my mind as a D4/D5 – probably close and definitely OK in many situations where its benefits work for me. I am so married to a pro body as my main camera – I am sure I can switch one day if needed. I really bought the D5 to fill a 2nd working camera hole and with sincere hope it would be as good as or better than my D4s but with more MP. I might still get a D500, I’ll see – if I can get something for my D800 I’d go for it – but two bodies have always served me well, you really can’t take a lifetime trip (ie: Alaska Coastal Bears) or something similar with just one body, its big risk, because stuff happens and trips like those are so expensive.
Rob
Hey Robert,
Thanks a lot for the detailed reply. Much appreciated. I own a D4, so I understand why you like the Nikon flagship cameras so much. Once you’ve had one, everything else kind of pales in comparison. That said, I am looking forward to seeing some creditable reviews of the D500 when it comes out. Definitely won’t match a D4/D4s/D5 when shooting at high ISO’s, but still hoping it’s a strong performer.
Thanks again!
Mac
i think if this is the best bear picture from d5 can do, with that pricey lens.
d750 is much better than that with a lower price. would be better to upgrade the lens to 800mm rob, dont waste your money to buy body that not even better than your previous.
Hello sevenfive
lol – I am not sure what you are seeing that makes you make that statement, but your point is about money, not photography – I get that
I am glad the D750 is so awesome for you :)
Good luck
Rob
Robert,
Thanks for sharing your first pictures from the new D5. It’s always more interesting to see some real world results. I do have to agree that the shots appear a bit soft in my opinion too, but not bad at all given the overcast, evening light.
The fact that you have some useable shots around 12,800 ISO is very promising. Being a D300s user, if the D500 gives acceptable results at 3,200, I will be happy.
[As an aside, is it now time to quote ISOs in a linear scale, rather than use silly high numbers for ‘marketing’? An increase in max ISO from say 8 (for 51k) to say 13 (for 1.5m) doesn’t sound so exciting!]
I have two questions if I may:
(i) Did you have high ISO NR on in camera? I’m wondering if such processing was kicking in on your D5 at the high ISOs, which whilst cleaning up the background, could also have smoothed some of the wanted detail.
(ii) What Picture Control settings were you using? I’d be interested in peoples thoughts for the best PC settings for low light situations to add some punch without degrading the IQ if possible.
My understanding is that these two features apply even to raw files.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing some more D5 shots from on a sunny day hopefully.
Hello Burghclerebilly
1st – Thanks and I personally think the D500 is going to be a great camera – I am kind of married to the PRO bodies and their tank like build :)
I did have in camera NR – but set to NORM – mainly because that’s what I set my D4s to and I wanted to compare the two – also I didn’t want the camera to do too much NR and affect the results – I thought NORM was a fair assessment setting
Picture control is left at default setting – I like to do most of this stuff post processing –
I have a photo on a better day – I will try and add it to the article – check back
PS: I don’t think a 10,000 ISO from different photographers is an equal example of ISO performance – If I had slightly better light the 10,000 ISO image would look better – that’s why I try to describe how the light was – because most of these examples were in fairly low tough light
Regards
Rob
Thanks Rob.
Yes definitely, I noted on another thread that many of the high ISO test shots from the manufacturers seem strangely to be of perfectly lit subjects using fast shutter speeds. I haven’t seen a specific test on it, but I’m sure a longish exposure high ISO shot say at 1/30 sec of an actually dark subject is much more susceptible to noise than a high ISO shot of a perfectly lit subject using short exposure like 1/1000 sec is.
Also with you on the full size bodies. I’ll probably get the grip on the D500, once they’ve moved away from the early adopter premiums. At my local camera store, they already have the lower prices programmed into their tills to start selling around in July/August at.
Robert,
Everyone is concerned with everything except the results! I am impressed at the quality photo you got from 1/80sec with the 600! Very nice work.
Hello Dan
I know, I don’t understand, I have many reasons for buying a camera of this quality, and the article wasn’t about price. It was just about sharing some sample images in really tough lighting conditions.
Thanks mate – BTW that was hand held :)
Rob
Robert,
Thanks for the quick look. The D5 seems to be a specialized camera that would work well in sports and nature. Like any new tool, we will have to wait a while for it to be tried out in more situations. I did hear a few opinions regarding the different buttons and configuration between the D5 and older cameras and having multiple cameras makes it a little confusing. Kind of like switching from guitar to mandolin to banjo…
Hello Steve
Thanks, yeah – actually Nikon Moved a couple of things on the D5 which is messing a little with me, the layout of the pro bodies have been the same for so long – not as big a deal as pro body to the smaller bodies.
I think the D5 is specialized in the sense that its an extremely high performing camera, built like a Mack truck, with many features that a wildlife or sports photographer seek – its not that there are not other cameras that do this, but the closer you get to maximizing your keeper photo keeper ratio, the more valuable a camera might become to someone. I’ll try and explain that in detail at some later time or article.
Rob
Nikon will soon have a range of professional tools available for people to choose from. I expect the D5 to be the best choice for those wanting the best image quality, focusing and fps at high ISOs (which will primarily be sports and wildlife shooters not portrait or landscape shooters). I expect the replacement for the D810 to be the best choice for those wanting the most pixels, best image quality and dynamic range at base ISO (generally studio, portrait and landscape shooters). I expect the D500 to be the best choice for those who want the most reach for the least cost (wildlife, especially birders, and sports). For those who want a robust build but don’t need the latest technology a used D4, D4s, D810 or D800 will be a great value. Don’t count them out. They will still produce the same stunning images they produced when first released. Just because a newer body has a few minor advantages here or there doesn’t mean you actually need those new abilities in every shot. A low shutter count D4 will soon be selling for half, or less than half, its original price: same with the D800. For those who don’t really need the most robust build (which is most of us) the D750 (and its replacement) as well as the D7200 (and its replacement) are remarkable tools at remarkable prices. We should think of Nikon DSLRs as tools in a tool box and select the best tool for the job at hand (just as we do lenses) rather than complain about a pliers because it isn’t as good as a needle nose pliers for one specific task. Much of the criticism of something in the D5 (such as base ISO dynamic range) not being as good as the same thing in a D750 (see Digital Photography Review’s comparison) is interesting to know but simply one attribute of one of the tools available to us. It a particular attribute (such as ISO invariance) is so important to you because of how you shoot and post process then select the D750 as your tool. The point of knowing the various strengths and weaknesses of any tool it to enable us to select the proper tool for the job at hand; not to criticize one tool because it isn’t best at all things. Criticisms of the D5 because it doesn’t have the dynamic range of the D4s at base ISO are misplaced. If the D4s has better dynamic range at the ISO you shoot, and that slightly better dynamic range is so important to you, then just buy a used D4s and save $2000. If the D810 has the best dynamic range at base ISO and you don’t need 12 fps, then just buy a D810. There really isn’t a problem to get all upset about. The same is true for other systems. If the Sony system has some advantages which are important to you (maybe an electric viewfinder so you can better pre-visualize the effect of your various adjustments) than just buy and use that system. Articles about the strengths and weaknesses of a certain body or lens are valuable because they inform us about the tools. Know the tools available to you and then select and use whatever tool best suits your needs and stop complaining about tools you don’t want to use. They are not deficient; they are just designed for a different task. Be thankful we have so many wonderful tools in our toolbox.
Hello Donald
Nice :)
Thanks
Rob
Donald,
Well maybe a used low shutter count D4 or D4s might sell for half the price, however I doubt that, the D5 means nothing, its’ by no means a game changer. Who would you buy a used one anyway, maybe from a little old lady that just used on Sundays ha…