The D500 looks like an amazing camera. Nikon finally was forced to do what they should have done years ago. Brought their FF auto-focus and put it in a crop body. Pentax took their APS-c AF and put it in an FF body.
The being said, this is probably the best be the best body for birds ever.
Quote: In our hands-on test we were impressed with continuous shooting. Even the sound of the shutter firing at 10 fps is somehow satisfying, and that 200 shot raw buffer is... awesome.
Did they boost the frame rate and buffer by going to a less MP sensor? 20 MP is like a K-S2, but even then, that's a compromise I hoped Pentax would make.
It looks great, is it worth switching for? You won't know until you hold it in your hot little hands. But at $2699 Canadian, it better be dam good. That's twice as much as I'd pay for a K-3II. If you have the money, go for it.
In my humble opinion, if you pay twice as much for something that's been made geared to your needs, then it's probably better than what you already own. (dude).
But, in my world of trying to squeeze the most out of every image, I'm the guy that will shoot wildlife at 100 ISO and 1/50s knowing motion blur is going to ruin 90% of my images, but in the end, when I nail it.. I've got the best image. It may have been harder to get it but, my K-3 or K-1 image if I nail it is going to be higher IQ than an D500 image. So, I'm trading on the fact that even though I might miss some images, if I get it it's going to be better.
Here
and here
And here
I got the images I wanted. And they are more MP than a D500 image. Maybe I only got 23 images in my buffer, instead of 200 and I still often end up with 800 images in a session. It's not how many you throw away, it's how many you want to keep. Maybe the D500 would have auto-focussed faster, but I'd have a 20 MP file instead of a 24, and the end result is pretty much the same, except if anything my K-3 image is better. Usually I'm only looking for 5 or 6 good images. And it's mores difference with the 36 MP K-1. If I get the shot i want with the K-1 it will leave a D750 or D500 image in the dust. I'm willing to put a bit of faith in my skill as photographer.
To me it's more pizzaz for less IQ capability.
To me, starting from scratch I might give something like a D750 or a D500 a look, but, I'm comfortable with what I have and I don't find learning new equipment to ba as enjoyable as just getting out and shooting, and that for me is the bottom line. I have places to go and stuff to take pictures of. I'll worry about getting a D500 when I retire from being retired.
I might have extra time then.
For me to consider switching there'd have to be some sessions where I came back with nothing, because the camera didn't AF or I ran out of buffer, and that just doesn't happen, even using my A-400. As long as i continue to get the images i want, the K-3 is better. And a K-1/K3 combination would be pretty much the ultimate.
The trouble with always buying the latest greatest, is next week there's a new latest greatest.
Last edited by normhead; 03-04-2016 at 08:24 AM.