Thank you for interesting video. The fact that Nikon D500, which is already 4 years old still can be compared with a brand new Canon 90D speacks for Nikon definetely. I know that D500 is Procamera, whereas 90D is only prosumer, but more than 3 years difference is not to forget. On the other hand, Canon did not updated its pro Aps-c DSLR - 7Dii. So we anyway have to compare D500 with 90D. Anyway, my conclussion is: Canon 90D is better for video; it has more megapixels 32 vs 21; canon has better menu which works in touchscreen mode (imho); canons body is lighter and has fully articulating display. On the other hand Nikon D500 has more capability for photography: better buffer; much better AF (153 points vs 45); 500D has better ISO; Nikon has dual cardslot and uses SD and XQD cards. In my opinion Nikons crop factor 1.5 is better than Canons veird 1.6. But this is only my opinion. So if someone needs crop dslr camera for video than 90D is better, because canon is stronger in video and Dual-pixel is exelent in liveview mode; Canon has more interesting and cheap lenses. But if you need crop dslr for photography (sport; wildlife, etc), than Nikon D500 is a clear winner. Another option is to wait until Canon updates its Pro level 7D series, or presents RF mount crop camera. It is also possible not to wait and to go immediately mirrorles. For them who consider crop sensors, the choise is between Fuji XT3/XT4; Sony 6600/6400; or Nikon Z50.
You will find that whenever a independent lens manufacturer produces a lens for Canon they also make the same lens for Nikon, the same is true for accessories.
As a Canon shooter and already invested in their lenses, the 90D will be next camera body. Having never shot Nikon, I can't make any comparisons on comments, though I imagine 500D is a fantastic camera. At the end of the day, the results will depend far more on the ablility of the photographer than on the 'superiority' of the camera body.
I was going to buy a Canon 90D but I have been reading "a lot" about there being a soft focus issue with it. Please don't shoot me over this statement because I don't own one and am only voicing my concern.
soft focus is do to cheap kit lens search meal the Maven on youtube he has vids on the suubject. 90D has very dense pixcel pitch so you nneed high resolvinng lenses
That doesnt mean you cant compare them. It depends on their usage how much this matters. 90% of people buying the "pro" Nikon are not pros! The image quality of the Canon poos all over the Nikon and for some users this will matter more than build quality or 2 card slots. He says the noise performance of the Nikon is superior but I have found that not to be the case. You have to neutralize any default noise reduction in whatever raw converter you use to get a proper comparison. Many reviewers get this wrong. The Northrupps even got this wrong when they reviewed the 7d mkii a few years back. Then they realized and had to put out a correction video. The 90D's sensor is the best apsc sensor ever made and indicates Canon have finally learned how to make a sensor!
@@markrigg6623 You are spot on about the 90D sensor it's insane with top spec glass!. I have had mine on my 85mm 1.4L IS it's phenomenal on this lens!.
The 90d is in an unfair fight. The D500 is superior. The AF system is the same as in the D5, a flagship full frame $6500 camera. The D500 is a PRO flagship Crop Sensor camera. The 90D is a crop sensor consumer/prosumer camera. The image quality some have spoken about is using APS-C lenses and the Nikon is a tad better not the same as the 90D, depends on the lens used. If you put better glass on them like a full frame lens (pro glass) the Nikon pulls away in IQ quite easily. Like another said, the D7500 vs the 90D is a much more fair comparison. The people saying the IQ is better on 90D are Canon people not realizing they are on an unfair comparison and feel the need to defend. I think they also don't realize that Nikon made a pro APS-C camera for wildlife and Canon made a fairly high end consumer camera for the masses.
Thanks for sharing...I have a Nikon D500 & happy with results...I also like the rear buttons lighting up for night shots...does the Canon have this feature ??... cheers 😀
Depends of whitch brand you allready have good glass......your comparisson Android /iPhone makes no sense....procameras....Maybe i am going crosseyed....but During events where there are a lot of pro photographers.....I see a whole lot of white lenses.....
Low light performance isn't weird it's obvious, tightly packed photosites produce more noise and you're comparing a 20mp sensor with a 32.5mp on the Canon, more noise is a given
please answer! is 90d pretty good video in lowlight? for a little cinematic video? like montages? AND is 90d good in lowlight photo? like wide shots? if not what kind of lenses should i get for photo and video??????
Marco Ferrito I will prefer Z6, I’m not sport or wild life photographer, Z6 better image quality, better video ability, newer, about lenses you still can buy used lenses with good price
You should buy a prime lens like 35mm or 50mm which is good for landscape. Nikon D750 is the best DSLR for landscape photography but since Nikon Z6 is available, I think you should go to Z6, but it is quite expensive while D750 is now on a bargain.
Hello! I have two option. Canon 90D with Sigma 150-600 contemporary lens or NikonD500 with Nikkor 200-500 lens. I am shooting wildlife photos and videos. What you suggest to me which should I chose ?
If this is a comparison video between the Canon 90D and the Nikon D500, why did you put pictures of a Canon 90D and a Nikon D750 at the start of your video?
Thank you. Helpful video. I’ve been using a Nikon 5300 for about 5 years for mostly taking sports/action pictures of my kids with various lenses but 70-200 mainly. I’m wondering, is it ok to still buy a Nikon d500 in 2020? Should I hold out for a year or so to see if Nikon releases a successor to the d500 or should I just switch to mirrorless altogether? I really think I would benefit from the faster shutter and large buffer of the d500 for my needs but I’m concerned that the d500 is almost 4 years old. In terms of mirrorless, the concern I’ve read is that they are less suited for action photography (Or at least with the mirrorless cameras that I can afford). I’d appreciate your input. Thanks again.
Have you considered d7500? In compare to your d5300 it has much better autofocus (from d750), low-light focus, 50% more battery life, touchscreen, faster shutter 1/8000, slightly better high iso performance...8 frames per second and 7-8 times more buffer capacity? photographylife.com/nikon-dslr-buffer-capacity-comparison
I love my 90D and I use it with the sigma 18-35 and it's a match well done. Incredible 32.5 megapixels and the quality prints for my clients are outstanding. Canon all day for my business. It's about how you use the camera and the 32.5 megapixels is the icing on the cake.
Most people who buy the D500 are amateurs. Its silly to try and base judgements over meaningless catagorisations like this. Its got a heavier duty body than the Canon for sure. To the vast majority of potential buyers that wont make any practical difference.
The 90d shoots upto 10 fps . It has dual pixel autofocus . It does have iso and other buttons on the top . It has viewfinder face detection . They both have touchscreen . You just skipped this details . Not good man !!
This is what people who have a camera, use the supplied camera strap advertising the camera brand and model and just shoot family vacations would be looking at as fast as what you base a buying decision on.
Nikon is usb3 and it’s still used on most external drives the single usb is slow unless a usb-c Nikon is real weather sealed as in full on rain ok with a weather sealed lens Nikon is better for pictures canon better for video Nikon is better for sports and low light.
You totally ignored the vastly superior touchscreen experience and world's apart video autofocusing. Pretty biased towards Nikon comparison. The D500 is a better camera, but you didn't do a full, fair comparison.
Nope, the 90d does not have 'vastly superior' touchscreen experience. the Nikon has great touchscreen too. It is the liveview where you would get 'vastly superior' experience on the 90d.
@@woodnymph7393 No, you haven't used a Canon, obviously. You can do EVERYTHING via the LCD including all the menu settings and a brilliant Q-menu which let's you change most settings without entering the menus.
@@cooloox I've used Canons but I don't see the 'vastly superior' touchscreen experience you're saying. The D500 also has great touchscreen via the LCD and Nikons also has the i-Menu where you can change your settings without going to the MENU. I repeat its the live view autofocus where the D500 is not great.
@@coolooxShut up old man. Go out and take photos instead of exaggerating Canon's camera features on every video you watch. Have you used the D500? Its touchscreen is excellent. When you press your selection, the lcd is responsive. Even if the Canon is better its not 'vastly superior'. Again, its in the liveview focusing where you can say the Canon 90d has vastly superior experience.You're one of those diehard fanboys who exaggerate everything.
Enjoyed Shooting with these DSLR Cameras. Which one do you think is better, Canon 90D or the Nikon D500? Hope you enjoy! Sorry about the minor edit error at 20:30. As usual, my videos are longer and more conversational. If you like deep dive discussion into gear, you'll like this video.
Interesting comparison though l think these cameras don't compete against each other. The 7D Mark ll was the natural competitor to the D500 but sadly Canon chose not to update it. FYI the Panasonic S series cameras take XQD cards. Also out of curiosity which accessories are available for Canon that aren't for Nikon? Or third party lens offerings? Both brands have a large ecosystem and a huge customer base.
I am a Canon user and a die-hard fan, but honestly, for this comparison, Nikon D500 is way more better than Canon 90D. I really like to buy Nikon D500 but the problem is, I need to spend more on lenses since I am on the Canon platform. What I like with Nikon D500 is the backlighted buttons (not mentioned in this review) which is very helpful at night, or shooting during a concert. I really don't like a person that conducts a review/comparison like this who is bias. I am a Canon user but I like Nikon D500 and is 100% better than Canon 90D maybe if Canon has 7D III, that would be the best comparison for Nikon D500. The only advantage for Canon 90D is the articulated screen and a few on video.
I bought the 90D and it was a mistake. I only bought the 90D because I had always shot Canon and the 90D had a pretty glowing review when it first came out, so I didn't even think twice. However, I have also just started shooting birds a year ago. For anyone who shoots birds would know unlike other types of photography it really pushes your equipment to its absolute limits. Only recently did I start looking into what other brands have to offer. One of which is the Nikon D500. And get this, the D500 is a 4 year old camera and is still better than the 90D. I only shoot stills, so I am just going to comment on the photography half of the camera as opposed to video too. The 90D AF is next to useless if you shoot via the viewfinder. You can only shoot in Spot and 1-Point. When you try to use Zone, Large Zone or Auto Selection, those tiny focusing squares are essentially asleep, they don't want to move and when they do move they don't often land on the subject. So, say if you want to shoot BIF, unless it is a large bird that is not flying fast, you don't stand half a chance. The first time I tried it, initially I thought it would be a good idea to use the focusing squares to give more encompassing coverage of the eagle, boy was I wrong or was I wrong!! Those focusing squares were way too slow and when I reviewed my focusing points in post my hit rate was close to zero. The only other option will be to shoot in Live View mode, in which case the same little focusing squares will come alive, they will move fast and lock in focus quick. However, from an operational standpoint, it is impossible to shoot in Live View mode unless you have one of those LCD viewfinder contraptions that you attach onto the LCD screen at the back of the camera whereby you would be able to press your head into the LCD viewfinder eyepiece to help your aim. Without it, you are basically holding the camera straight out and it will be impossible to aim at the bird, let alone BIF, LOL. In short, in the context of bird photography, I have since discovered Canon by and large makes inferior cameras. I never thought that since I only based my judgement previously on merely brand perception at the time. My conclusion now is if you want to stay with DSLR, then the Nikon D850 and D500 are your best options, if not it is really time to migrate to mirrorless. Pending on what the coming Canon R5 will be like, other than that your best mirrorless options will probably be the Sony A7R IV or A9.
OMG this the most uninformed video ever. The Nikon D500 is made for action, sport and wildlife. It has with an amazing autofocus 9same as the Nikon d5 and a plethora of Nikon and as well as third party lenses.
this seemss bias it seems you're comparing a a none pro canon wiith 32 mpix censor to a 21 mpix censor two slot pro Nikon ..You can customize every button on the canon minus the del and pics review button plus there's two custon menu's on the mode dial top left c1 c2 plus the custom star menu on the LCD screen. the D500 is priced at $2k with kit lens the 90D around $1200 ish with kit lens. the 90D is 32mpix compared to 21 mpix for the Nikon whichh would clearllyy make Nikonn faster with the buffer only thing fair about this comparison is they're both APC compare the 5Dmk 4 or 6D mk two. that's a fair comparison.
Being a Canon 5Dsr shooter myself, if I had to choose between these two not considering all the EF-mount lenses I own, I'd go for the D500 without doubt. To date, the D500 is a legend of a camera, similarly to the D850 and there is nothing in its category that beats it (strictly speaking about the camera body and its sensor though, not considering lenses and accessories). Some people here also stated that the comparison between the 90D and D500 is an uneven one and I agree. The D500 is PRO-level while the D90 is prosumer-level, due to Canon's own decision to release 90D over 7Diii, surely to get more return on investment. No doubt a wise choice for Canon, though to the disadvantage of serious Canon wildlife shooters.
Had a D750. Sold and bought a D500. Images are sharper (no AA). ISO not much different either, 6400 produces nice keepers. Autofocuses like magic. For action and wildlife it is a definite upgrade over 750. Viewfinder is as good too. And dx lenses are lighter and cheaper.
I’m looking at upgrading my 1300d/Rebel T6 and shoot mainly Street with some Landscape/Seascape thrown in. I’m on a budget but need something that’s still going to be relevant in 4/5 years, would you think the 90d would suffice? I’ve 5 lenses but only one EF and a Sigma or I may have looked at Full Frame, I was also looking at Mirrorless but don’t like what I’ve seen with the RP, I do like the Fuji set ups but want an articulating screen if possible so I can shoot a Low Point Of View and being registered disabled a tilt screen wouldn’t work. With that in mind I guess it would have to be at least the Fuji XT-3, I can get a used XT 20 with 2 lenses, a bag which I definitely don’t need, cpl & uv filters for £500 but again a tilt screen and getting old. I apologise for the long post but I’m trying to do as much research as I can as though £1000-£1200 may not be that much in a Photography sense to me it’s a big purchase
In action we tested the 90D, the flipping of the mirror is at 10fps slower then the 7Dmk2 and the D500 was the fastest, that gives viewfinder tracking human errors, The hitrate of frames infocus burst in a row, both with a 400mm f2,8(IS-type1 or VR) was the best with the D500, then the 7Dmk2, the 90D AF accuracy is closer to the 80D, the extra pixels and its in theory more resolving power (32,5 vs 20) when the subject is at 80 meters with the 400mm and beyond is almost not visible.. With the 90D you have to have the newest, the best lenses , at short distance till 200mm you wil have more details, at more distance this benefit declines. our wildlife group did pas, sorry, the old 7Dmk2 does better on the 400 f2,8, 500mm f4,0.. the D500 and the 300mm f4,0PF + TC14Eiii the best, then the 400, bit slower the AFS 500mm f4,0IFED ii ( no VR)but was the best in end details at a distance.. with long lenses at a distance 32.5 Mp seems to be a bit pointless ..(DXO Labs 3 was used on the RAW files for the Max -> sharpness/noise/fine detail ratio)
@@joyindeeamornchai754 Yes it does.. but you need lenses or a lens combination ( lens + TC) that is extreem high quality.. a Nikon 500mm f4.0VR + TC is not as scharp as the Canon 500mm f4,0 ISii + TC , so Nikon D850 and crop it 1,4x extra was only a bit better the the EOS 5Dmk4 using the TC.., the Nikon did win becouse of the f4 instead of f5,6 and the better DR... you could say : wow , the sensor of the D850 is that good??? or Wow the Canon lenses + TC are that good?? The 90D looses if you do not use the TC and crop 1.4x extra , a 500mm f4.0 can not resolve the fines details at a distance( 50/100 meters) , it is calculated to Fullframe 83Mp !! It is not the sensor, it is the distance that ruins it.. You can get better details if the lens and pixel pitch match better.. (arcsec/ fine details versus pixelpitch, becomes critic above 400mm) So a old D200 from 2005 , with only 10Mp + Sigma 800mm f5,6 can out preform the 90D + 400mm f2.8 + 2xTC at a big distance, if it gets close and you use a 300mm f2.8 , the 90D will blow away almost everything.There is a list of lenses that are preforming good on a 90D, a lot of older glass can seem to be not good enough.. You can get a bit blurry picture , captured with a lot of pixels..32.5 Mp, cheap sigma 150-600 www.flickr.com/photos/183825831@N03/49580043107/in/pool-3640965@N25/ 10Mp and an even cheaper lens 150-500 , cropped till only 4Mp is left www.flickr.com/photos/155811692@N04/49270702406/in/dateposted-public/
@@joyindeeamornchai754 As a Nikon shooter I will ask in the group and answer as soon as possible.. it has the most modern lens coatings.. for digital image sensors , that helps: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-41PvCOZgpC4.html But think that a Sigma 150-600 + 7Dmk2 a bit better is the the 100-400 + 90D cropped , becouse the angle off view is not the same als magnification... example : D850 45.7Mp FF at -> DX crop = 19.5MP( factor 0.425 pixels are left) , while 500mm becomes a 750mm (cropfactor 1.5x) 1,5x more reach gives 57,5 less resolution.. actual reach , wilth real good optics is better.. You have to know if the 150-600C is good enough..It personally think till 350mm it is not, beyond it will drop but reach is better, if you have to crop strong at 600mm, to a magnification like 1200mm , the difference will be not as big as you calculate, 20Mp 7Dmk2 vs 32.5 Mp 90D will not give 1.6x more details, maybe +/-1.3 thats it. If you crop the 100-400mm to 1200mm , it will be a lot worse . So a 150-600 + 7Dmk2 , can beat a 100-400 + 90D at stronger crop in post.Will the 90D + 150-600 then better? maybe a bit, but not 1.6x better..( 400mm = 6 degrees, 600mm 4 degrees... factor 1.5x (nikon) but the pixel loss if you crop is not 1,5 but much more...becouse you lose pixels at the bottom, at the left , right and above , only use the middele section 42.5% of the pixels are left, not 50% I will ask in the group.. and answer later ..
Thanks for the video. I don't think the Canon 90d is their top of the range APSc. That's still the Canon 7d. Like you I have bought into the Nikon Z system. I also decided to sell my existing Canon APSc bodies and buy the Canon 90d with the proceeds.
you're kidding right? how on earth is the 7D Mark II better than the 90D? much older senser, no 4K ability, no touch screen lcd, no fully articulated screen, larger body and slower processor, slower AF system, much worse ISO tolerance, no wireless connection, much heavier for no reason, significantly less battery runtime even tho 7d mii battery life is not bad, so how is the 7D Mark II better?
@@martinhommel9967 The 7D mkii has actually been discontinued. The 90 D is now their top apsc camera. 7D mkii has a better focus system but inferior image quality to the 90D so for birds in flight it will perform better.
Although d500 is a pro body it was too little too late even when it was launched. Still a great option but a bit dated. Even though I like its bulky and though body so much, I would rather choose 90d over d7500 and k-3 III over d500.
only canon fanboys would say that. In reality all brands take great pictures. there is no 'much better' difference in any brand. The Nikon takes slightly cleaner pictures in high iso plus the focus accuracy and tracking of the D500 would give you more in-focus images compared to the 90d. Out-of-focus images on the 90d will not give you 'much better' pictures. lol..
People take pictures, not cameras! If you are talking megapixels, you have to quadruple the number of pixels to double the resolution. The D90 only has 50% more pixels. You would need to enlarge images to at least 300% just to see the difference!
Really like your reviews great job, just one small gripe, Canon has NOT been the low light leader in the industry since at least 2012, when Nikon released the D800. It always confuses me how Canon shooters have a tendency to migrate to Sony for their low light capabilities, but Nikon has had nearly identical lowlight performance to Sony (even the A7R3) since 2012. Sensorwise Canon has not been competitive in the full frame market for nearly 8 years. Although it sounds like that may be changing.
The D810 and D850 are noisy at higher ISOs. The D750 is much cleaner. Nikons are not special in low light. The old Canon 6D is better than the D810 at high ISO.
cooloox the 6d is a 20mp sensor, higher res sensors like the 36mp sensor in the d810 have high res noise. The 6d also has a little less than 12 stops of dynamic range which is no where near to the 15ish in any relatively new Nikon. I’ve worked with a 6d in the past, not even close to comparable with a d810😂
I've owned the D500 for 2.5 years, out of 95,000 clicks, i can say i barely remember any missed focused shots. It doesnt miss. Excellent sensor. The dynamic range is phenomenal.
There's a crop sensor comparison between the Z50, M6 Mk II, X-T30 and A6400 (I think) and they rated the Z50 as last for image quality. Their criticism was that the Z50 sensor is old and has been surpassed by the others. The M6 Mk II came first. It has much higher megapixels than the others with no hit in quality, dynamic range or noise. Other video reviewers I've watched have liked the Z50 image quality (they were not comparing it to anything else) . It was DPreview, from memory, who did that comparison video.
