Help me understand FX vs. DX

[Blacktop]

Incorrect. While what happens after the sensor does play a role, it is all about light gathering and that is entirely done by the sensor. Why do you think the D4(s) has such massive sensor pixels? More light, better colors, less noise. It's about surface area times quantum efficiency. The reason there is no DX capable of doing what an FX does (in terms of light) is purely of a technical reason; too small sensor pixels. If they develop a lower Mpix DX tomorrow, they could increase the pixel size and gain the same light gathering as an FX but no 24Mpix will be able.

Even the D810's increase in Mpix comes at the expense of light gathering because you can't put more pixels on a surface area and maintain their size. If they develop a 50Mpix FX with exactly the same pixels as a DX it'll have the same low light performance a current DX has.

I personally would never trade light for pixels.

New technology like the BSI sensors might make the new DX outperform the current FX but since that technology can and will be applied to FX too, DX will always run behind. It simply lacks the surface area to compete. Just like no FX can ever compete against a medium format.

So the D300 should outshine the D810 in light gathering and low noise at higher ISO. No?

 

[J-see]

So the D300 should outshine the D810 in light gathering and low noise at higher ISO. No?

If it had the same quantum efficiency yes. But while the D810 registers about every other photon, the D300 does only one in three.

 

[Vincent]

The discussion is now about FX vs DX and lost the D7200 vs D750.

The sensors can be found here:
List of all Nikon DSLR cameras and their sensor manufacturer/designer | Nikon Rumors

=> you will see that most high end still have Nikon sensors, except high pixel models. DX mostly now has Sony or Toshiba. So there is a difference in technology. (remark: Nikon designed sensors are sometimes produced by Sony)

The sales issue was pointed out with the

Nikon NC81338L

D3, D700

where the D3 underperformed due to the D700 success. So Nikon does now design the quality per model to avoid this for the future.

The same tech in DX as FX was more discussed with D7000 and D800:
Senscore states:
D800 Photosite Size: 4.9 μm reference score of 1000 for all measurements
D7000 Photosite Size: 4.8 μm
Noise: 409 σ = 7.7
Dynamic Range: 583 σ = 4.2
Color Range: 254 σ = 6.0
Tonal Range: 620 σ = 4.3
Resolving Power: 451 σ = 4.9
The question here is this difference due to design (claimed by salukfan111) or more linked to measurement procedures (downsizing etc). So is it possible to release a D400 with scores of 1000 at 15 Mpix?

I wanted here also to compare to the D3s: Resolving Power: 466 σ = 1.9 a better resolving then the D7000 even if it is a lower Mp, but high end FX.

====================
One other thing (one where I agree with Ken Rockwell), sharpness of pictures generally is more linked to the photographer then to the material (even if better material can help) and is overrated.

 

[Vincent]

Did this discussion just change into, do I need a D500 to complement my D5?

Both 20 Mp, both high ISO (DX a bit behind), both high speed 10 fps, both buffers of 200 pictures, etc...

 

[J-see]

Did this discussion just change into, do I need a D500 to complement my D5?

Both 20 Mp, both high ISO (DX a bit behind), both high speed 10 fps, both buffers of 200 pictures, etc...

Depending on the price of the D500, a D810 to compliment the D5 might be the better option. Assuming someone that needs a D5 does plenty a portrait too.

 

[Danno]

Did this discussion just change into, do I need a D500 to complement my D5?

Both 20 Mp, both high ISO (DX a bit behind), both high speed 10 fps, both buffers of 200 pictures, etc...

That will be an interesting discussion...

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

 

[Chris@sabor]

Pretty sure this has turned into do I get the d500 or the d500!

 

[Vincent]

Pretty sure this has turned into do I get the d500 or the d500!

Still the original question remains valid: I actually think the D5 vs D500 is a good example of FX vs DX.

Based on this (just seems to be a sales pitch to me):
Nikon D500 specifications and features explained (confidential Nikon internal document) | Nikon Rumors

D5 and D500 same technology.
- size of sensor + body smaller for D500
--D500 in DX format, for high end user needing superior agility and telephoto shooting.
--D500 lower ISO range due to smaller pixel pitch
--AF points cover different area
--Viewfinder coverage different (D5 covers more space, but D500 covers 100% of its sensor)
- weather protection
--D5 is monocoque, D500 is adopted body?
--Tilting LCD only on D500
- D5 has 400000 cycles, D500 is adapted DX shutter up to 200000
- D500 has extra vibration reduction, Active D-Lighting, snapbridge extra
- Battery: D5 3780 pictures, 1240 for D500

Important no difference in technology processor of AF module. (e.g. some D500 body dimensions are bigger then the D750 to fit the module).

Limitation on the Mp to assure the fps and ISO can be high.
-- 10 fps and 12 fps are a bit of a mystery, same processor and same Mp to same card format (XQD fastest): is the Expeed5 running on lower clock speed in the D500?
-- It would be normal that the high quality (reject rate) rated Expeed5 batches will be used exclusively for the D5 and that lower acceptable batches might go to the D500.
D500 has other video programming allowing longer 4K recording???

 

[salukfan111]

Still the original question remains valid: I actually think the D5 vs D500 is a good example of FX vs DX.

Based on this (just seems to be a sales pitch to me):
Nikon D500 specifications and features explained (confidential Nikon internal document) | Nikon Rumors

D5 and D500 same technology.
- size of sensor + body smaller for D500
--D500 in DX format, for high end user needing superior agility and telephoto shooting.
--D500 lower ISO range due to smaller pixel pitch
--AF points cover different area
--Viewfinder coverage different (D5 covers more space, but D500 covers 100% of its sensor)
- weather protection
--D5 is monocoque, D500 is adopted body?
--Tilting LCD only on D500
- D5 has 400000 cycles, D500 is adapted DX shutter up to 200000
- D500 has extra vibration reduction, Active D-Lighting, snapbridge extra
- Battery: D5 3780 pictures, 1240 for D500

Important no difference in technology processor of AF module. (e.g. some D500 body dimensions are bigger then the D750 to fit the module).

Limitation on the Mp to assure the fps and ISO can be high.
-- 10 fps and 12 fps are a bit of a mystery, same processor and same Mp to same card format (XQD fastest): is the Expeed5 running on lower clock speed in the D500?
-- It would be normal that the high quality (reject rate) rated Expeed5 batches will be used exclusively for the D5 and that lower acceptable batches might go to the D500.
D500 has other video programming allowing longer 4K recording???

Keep in mind that NIKON will intentionally handicap the D500 a bit to avoid hurting sales on FFs high profit models like the 810 and D5. This D500 might gut the D750 like a fish or at the very least drive the price down. I think that anyone who does any sort of outdoors/sports shooting could justify buying a D750 over a D500. I guess we'll have to see once some D500 fall into the hands of people that aren't DX or FF fanboys so we get objective comparisons.

 

[Vincent]

First of all we will have to take the cameras as they come, have not heard of hacks to increase the un-leached capacity of cameras.
So we have to live with the camera as we get it.

Concerning D750 vs D500, that will be interesting.
Totally agree, we really have to wait till April to get some real info if the D500 breaks the DX myths.

 

[salukfan111]

First of all we will have to take the cameras as they come, have not heard of hacks to increase the un-leached capacity of cameras.
So we have to live with the camera as we get it.

Concerning D750 vs D500, that will be interesting.
Totally agree, we really have to wait till April to get some real info if the D500 breaks the DX myths.

What will really be cool is once the 50mp ffs are going and they are straining to get up to 10fps with those huge files, they'll be working on a 75+MP FF via a 35mp DX sensored camera. That camera with the bells and whistles a 50MP FF is using will be really sweet.

I'm not buying the D500 until there are a ton of reviews and the price comes down. Let's just wait and see how this plays out. I do admit it will be funny watching FF fanboys dream up all the ways FF are superior moving forward. I really don't care but it is fun to watch.

 

[Vincent]

What will really be cool is once the 50mp ffs are going and they are straining to get up to 10fps with those huge files, they'll be working on a 75+MP FF via a 35mp DX sensored camera. ...

I do not get it, it seems like the D810 conlusion before, high Mp FX is a good alternative. FF performance and high capable of crop.
In the example above as well, it will be a higher fps for a DX mode. Not 2 cameras.

 

[salukfan111]

Did this discussion just change into, do I need a D500 to complement my D5?

Both 20 Mp, both high ISO (DX a bit behind), both high speed 10 fps, both buffers of 200 pictures, etc...

Based upon the d500 release, perhaps you might want to get a d5 to compliment your d500

 

[Philnz]

I have just read all 10 pages of this post. my head is spinning but I have learned a lot. Still think a D750 is my next camera. Just need to get the cash up together that's the hard part when you are to old to work anymore:hurt:

 

[hark]

I have just read all 10 pages of this post. my head is spinning but I have learned a lot. Still think a D710 is my next camera. Just need to get the cash up together that's the hard part when you are to old to work anymore:hurt:

You'll be waiting a long, long time for that one since Nikon hasn't yet made it. Lol!

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

I have just read all 10 pages of this post. my head is spinning but I have learned a lot. Still think a D710 is my next camera. Just need to get the cash up together that's the hard part when you are to old to work anymore:hurt:

I skipped the D710 and went straight to the D750.

Going from the D7100 to the D750 is quite the jump. I still love the D7100 but the low light capabilities of the D750 are fantastic.

 

[Philnz]

You'll be waiting a long, long time for that one since Nikon hasn't yet made it. Lol!

Change that to D750

 

[Bikerbrent]

This new thread might shed some light on this subject.

Nikon DX camera vs. cropping or putting a teleconverter on a full frame body | Nikon Rumors