Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 119822" data-attributes="member: 9240">Just to close this out, I've spent a huge chunk of my free time these last 4 days deciding what it is I either want to do now or plan to do moving forward.  The D7100 made a ton of sense had it not been for the buffer, so now I was stuck between waiting for a D300 replacement which may or may not ever materialize, make the move to a D800 knowing that it's got a lot of what the D7x00 gives me built in (16MP's at DX 1.5 crop) and then some, or just stick with what I have.Interestingly enough, my answer came when I reread <a href="http://photographylife.com/nikon-dx-vs-fx" target="_blank">this article</a>, which I'd posted in another thread where where we were discussing sensor sizes.  I knew all about the impact of crop factor on "equivalent focal length".  What I'd forgotten, or perhaps never fully realized, was that a 24MP DX sensor is not the same as a 24MP FX sensor.  That since a DX sensor is less than 1/2 the size of an FX sensor they have to decrease the pixel size significantly to get the same number crammed into a smaller space.  That a smaller pixel size means more noise and less dynamic range.  Essentially, the guts of why an FX sensor is that much more expensive than a DX sensor, and delivers such phenomenal Image Quality - something I experinced firsthand when I added my D600 to my D7000.If I look only at the birding exercise that so convinced me the D7100 may be my next camera, while I may not be grabbing that awesome bump in focal length when I stick a 500mm on a D7100 in 1.3x mode (16MP per image), a D800 with the same lens shooting in DX mode theoretically gives me the same 16MP resolution with higher IQ, and the 8 or 9 fps the D7100 was giving me is now likely 25+ allowing me to fire away for 6 or 7 seconds if I want.  So on these numbers alone, the D800 wins out in almost every consideration except frame rate for the first second and a half (after that, it's a moot point).  And, on top of that, it's still a D800 and has everything that goes with it.  Given that I'm not a sports guy and fps by itself is not the deciding factor but reasonable fps for a reasonabe amount of time, 4 fps will be more than enough 95% of the time that I use it, which is probably only 5% of the time, and everything else is gravy.So, after experiencing the IQ I get from my D600 it was an easy decision to say that the next camera will be another FX.  Given the current instant rebate situation and an influx of cash from a music-related sale, I bit the bullet and ordered.  If it's everything I hope then I may just use this to replace the D600, though I suspect that they will co-exist for a long time.  My D90 needs to get photographed and sold, and my D7000 will get used when appropriate, either by me or the Mrs.  Thanks to my proximity to B&H, it'll be here tomorrow.  This will also allow me the opportunity to ship off the D600 to Nikon for dust removal and a check-up.It was an occasionally painful, but extremely rewarding exercise.  I learned and relearned a lot, and really assessed my needs and wants, both now and moving forward.  I appreciate all the insight - particularly the things that pushed me in a different direction.   I am absolutely clear that I am not buying a birding camera - I am buying a camera that will deliver great results for all my photo needs, and likely outperform my D7000 as a birder.  I will certainly do some side-by-side IQ comparisons between the two, if only to see what's what, and I'll put a blog together with the results once I get comfortable with the new camera.</blockquote>

Verification