Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ISOhappy" data-source="post: 642885" data-attributes="member: 44145">I don't know about those cameras, I'm talking about digital camera sensors with pixels.I'm not sure what we're fussing about here.&nbsp; The advantage of higher px density is very real.&nbsp; How about instead of calling it reach, we call it the &quot;pixel density advantage.&quot;&nbsp; See this:<a href="http://www.robsphotography.co.nz/Nikon-D800-vs-Nikon-D3200.html" target="_blank">An analysis of the pixel size of the 36mp full frame Nikon D800 compared with the pixel size of the 24 mp APS-C Nikon D3200). Crop factor of Nikon D3200. Pixel size of Nikon D800 vs pixel size of Nikon D3200</a>When comparing an FX camera to a DX camera, and the DX camera has a higher px density, it has a distinct advantage.&nbsp; Simply cropping a DX shot out of the center of the FX frame will give a smaller and blurrier image.&nbsp; What's nice about the D850 is that it nearly matches the px density of the D500, so you can crop out the center and get the same thing.&nbsp; I think this is what the OP was asking.&nbsp; Yes, you can put the D850 in DX mode and it should give nearly the same results as using a DX camera like the D500.&nbsp; You end up with a 19.4MP image vs 21 MP from the D500.An excerpt from the above article:Crop an image from D800 to the same&nbsp; field of view&nbsp; as an image from D3200&nbsp;Gain in image width (in pixels) as a result of the above 25.5% pixel density advantage&nbsp;Uncropped image width of D3200 = 6016 pixels&nbsp;Cropped image width of D800to same field of view as D3200&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; = 4756 pixels&nbsp; (7360 x 23.2 / 35.9)&nbsp;Relationship: D3200 is approximately 26.5% greater than D800.And that, in my book , is more reach.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ISOhappy, post: 642885, member: 44145"] I don't know about those cameras, I'm talking about digital camera sensors with pixels. I'm not sure what we're fussing about here. The advantage of higher px density is very real. How about instead of calling it reach, we call it the "pixel density advantage." See this: [URL="http://www.robsphotography.co.nz/Nikon-D800-vs-Nikon-D3200.html"]An analysis of the pixel size of the 36mp full frame Nikon D800 compared with the pixel size of the 24 mp APS-C Nikon D3200). Crop factor of Nikon D3200. Pixel size of Nikon D800 vs pixel size of Nikon D3200[/URL] When comparing an FX camera to a DX camera, and the DX camera has a higher px density, it has a distinct advantage. Simply cropping a DX shot out of the center of the FX frame will give a smaller and blurrier image. What's nice about the D850 is that it nearly matches the px density of the D500, so you can crop out the center and get the same thing. I think this is what the OP was asking. Yes, you can put the D850 in DX mode and it should give nearly the same results as using a DX camera like the D500. You end up with a 19.4MP image vs 21 MP from the D500. An excerpt from the above article: [B]Crop an image from D800 to the same [/B][I][B]field of view [/B][/I] [B]as an image from D3200[/B] [B]Gain in image width (in pixels) as a result of the above 25.5% pixel density advantage[/B] Uncropped image width of D3200 = [B] 6016 pixels[/B] Cropped image width of D800 to same field of view as D3200 = [B] 4756 pixels[/B] (7360 x 23.2 / 35.9) [I][B]Relationship:[/B][/I][U] D3200 is approximately 26.5% greater than D800. [/U]And that, in my book , is more reach. [/QUOTE]

Verification