Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="STM" data-source="post: 117198" data-attributes="member: 12827">I agree that you should probably switch to FX for the higher image quality and especially depth of field control, which is miserable with DX, but honestly, I think people need to consider how large they plan to print their images and use that as a guide for camera selection. The one thing that really dismays and baffles me about digital photography over film is that people tend to get so wrapped around the axle about megapixels and other techie stuff. If you are going to print at most 11 x 14, then 12 MP is plenty. I still use a D700 and will for the foreseeable future and honestly, for both personal and commercial work I do, some of which has been turned into billboards, for up to 16 x 20, it is more than sufficient. Is switching to a 36 MP D800 over the 12 MP D700 I am using now going to make me a better photographer? The answer is a resounding  HELL NO. If I want to blow the doors off digital, and I can, I can just use my Hasselblad and Kodak T-Max 100 or Ektar 100 film. When scanning 120 film, I find I actually have to BLUR it slightly for portraiture because the client does not want to see the individual hairs of peach fuzz on their chin. 120 film and my 150mm f/4 Sonnar is BRUTALLY sharp. When I print portaiture stuff in 120, I actually use a Cokin softening filter under the enlarging lens so it is not as sharp.</blockquote>