Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
D600/D610
DX Auto-Crop
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Geoffc" data-source="post: 388296" data-attributes="member: 8705"><p>@<a href="http://nikonites.com/member-31330-j-see.html" target="_blank">J-see</a> I'm intrigued by you findings as everything I've ever read and the controlled testing that I've performed myself is completely the opposite of what you are describing here. I had the chance to try a D700 and D300 a couple of years ago and I wanted to compare the crop factor. The "full" shots are the masters and shot at 200mm F4, with a 70-200 VRII 2.8 lens. The others are crops to make the image the same size. The really interesting one is the letter B. I thought they would be the same but the 700 is not cutting it on these as you can see what the lack of pixels does. The results of the test are <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/sets/72157629889340922/#" target="_blank">here</a> and quite clear to me. <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/9815047825/in/set-72157635643881744" target="_blank">Here</a> is a more recent test that I did between the D7100 and the D800.</p><p></p><p>I have a D800 and D7100 that I use for different things. If I want reach and detail when I can't fill the FX frame with the lenses I have the D7100 comes out and delivers more resolution. I use it for both wildlife and macro. Whereas the D800 is better for high ISO and landscapes type photography as reach doesn't tend to be an issue and I can use all 36mpix.</p><p></p><p>Lenses is also another interesting point. As a general rule, FX lenses are in their sweet spot on DX cameras because they only use the centre of the lens which tends to be sharpest. My 70-200 2.8 is great on DX for example.</p><p></p><p>I make a conscious decision whether to use the 7100 or the 800 based on what I'm trying to achieve. Neither is better, they are different. I know other people like @<a href="http://nikonites.com/member-9240-backdoorhippie.html" target="_blank">BackdoorHippie</a> also choose their tools based on the job.</p><p></p><p>I am further intrigued that you need twice the light for DX. If I put the same lens on my FX and DX cameras and manually set shutter speed, F stop and ISO to the same values the exposure will be the same. I normally measure using a light meter to make sure it's correct. I suspect you have used the internal meter which will be looking at two different sized areas and there evaluating different criteria. Please confirm that everything was full manual, measured with a handheld meter and only non processed raw was used for the test or it all becomes a bit meaningless due to all the variables in measurement and processing. I recently tested our two D7100 bodies and the D800 and under that kind of control they are pretty much identical.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Geoffc, post: 388296, member: 8705"] @[URL="http://nikonites.com/member-31330-j-see.html"]J-see[/URL] I'm intrigued by you findings as everything I've ever read and the controlled testing that I've performed myself is completely the opposite of what you are describing here. I had the chance to try a D700 and D300 a couple of years ago and I wanted to compare the crop factor. The "full" shots are the masters and shot at 200mm F4, with a 70-200 VRII 2.8 lens. The others are crops to make the image the same size. The really interesting one is the letter B. I thought they would be the same but the 700 is not cutting it on these as you can see what the lack of pixels does. The results of the test are [URL="https://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/sets/72157629889340922/#"]here[/URL] and quite clear to me. [URL="https://www.flickr.com/photos/teerecks/9815047825/in/set-72157635643881744"]Here[/URL] is a more recent test that I did between the D7100 and the D800. I have a D800 and D7100 that I use for different things. If I want reach and detail when I can't fill the FX frame with the lenses I have the D7100 comes out and delivers more resolution. I use it for both wildlife and macro. Whereas the D800 is better for high ISO and landscapes type photography as reach doesn't tend to be an issue and I can use all 36mpix. Lenses is also another interesting point. As a general rule, FX lenses are in their sweet spot on DX cameras because they only use the centre of the lens which tends to be sharpest. My 70-200 2.8 is great on DX for example. I make a conscious decision whether to use the 7100 or the 800 based on what I'm trying to achieve. Neither is better, they are different. I know other people like @[URL="http://nikonites.com/member-9240-backdoorhippie.html"]BackdoorHippie[/URL] also choose their tools based on the job. I am further intrigued that you need twice the light for DX. If I put the same lens on my FX and DX cameras and manually set shutter speed, F stop and ISO to the same values the exposure will be the same. I normally measure using a light meter to make sure it's correct. I suspect you have used the internal meter which will be looking at two different sized areas and there evaluating different criteria. Please confirm that everything was full manual, measured with a handheld meter and only non processed raw was used for the test or it all becomes a bit meaningless due to all the variables in measurement and processing. I recently tested our two D7100 bodies and the D800 and under that kind of control they are pretty much identical. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
D600/D610
DX Auto-Crop
Top