Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="aroy" data-source="post: 320616" data-attributes="member: 16090">Though the image on the sensor is same on both the FX and DX sensor, the pixels per image length/height will be more in a DX, provided both have same MP. So in case the object on the sensor, say a bird, is smaller than the shorter side of DX, you get more details with DX. That is the advantage od DX over FX on wild life shots. Unless the animal is standing very close, its image (even with 600mm) may be much less than the 16mm of the DX sensor's height. So you get more pixels and that means more resolution.For example take the case of 24MP sensors, which are approximately 6000 x 4000 pixels. The frame sizes are 36x24 for FX and 24x16. So the pixels/mm are 166.67 and 250 respectively. Now a bird which is about 12mm on the sensor will have 2000 and 3000 pixels respectively. This is what is popularly referred to as the &quot;Magnification Factor&quot; for DX lenses.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="aroy, post: 320616, member: 16090"] Though the image on the sensor is same on both the FX and DX sensor, the pixels per image length/height will be more in a DX, provided both have same MP. So in case the object on the sensor, say a bird, is smaller than the shorter side of DX, you get more details with DX. That is the advantage od DX over FX on wild life shots. Unless the animal is standing very close, its image (even with 600mm) may be much less than the 16mm of the DX sensor's height. So you get more pixels and that means more resolution. For example take the case of 24MP sensors, which are approximately 6000 x 4000 pixels. The frame sizes are 36x24 for FX and 24x16. So the pixels/mm are 166.67 and 250 respectively. Now a bird which is about 12mm on the sensor will have 2000 and 3000 pixels respectively. This is what is popularly referred to as the "Magnification Factor" for DX lenses. [/QUOTE]

Verification