Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
General Digital SLR Cameras
New -- Recommended Camera & Lenses
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hark" data-source="post: 649783" data-attributes="member: 13196"><p>Both bodies are excellent choices and both have the ability to produce fantastic images. The difference in price between FX and DX glass can be quite high depending upon what you choose. When you buy lenses, please think of them as investments. Quite often we will continue to use the same lenses even if we change or upgrade bodies. </p><p></p><p>Fast glass (lenses with f/2.8 or larger apertures) allow faster shutter speeds to be used while keeping the ISO as low as possible. That can be crucial in low light situations. Fast glass also yields more bokeh when compared with equivalent slower lenses (granted, bokeh is dependent upon the distance between the camera and subject as well as the distance between subject and background). Fast glass can give a razor thin depth of field that isn't available with slower lenses under the same situations. </p><p></p><p>Quite often (but not always) fast lenses tend to have metal mounts. Many of the slower lenses have plastic mounts--especially the newer G lenses. </p><p></p><p>Many people love Tamron's newest 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 lens. It's fast, has their version of vibration reduction, but costs far less than Nikon's 24-70mm VR lens. </p><p></p><p>But here's the thing...you'd be best to decide whether you want to stick with a DX or FX body first. If you start out with a DX body and DX lenses then decide to upgrade to an FX body down the road, you'd be better off getting new FX lenses to go with that FX body. And that will cost you more in the long run. Both a DX and FX body will fill your needs. If you are into birding or macro, then DX would work well. You can do birding or macro with FX, but it might mean adding a teleconverter or extension tubes to yield similar results as you'd get with DX. </p><p></p><p>You have a lot of things to consider. Please be sure to weigh all options to make the best choice for your needs...and desires. FX is excellent and many people have such a strong desire for it...but you need to understand the differences and make an educated choice.</p><p></p><p>Good luck! :encouragement:</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hark, post: 649783, member: 13196"] Both bodies are excellent choices and both have the ability to produce fantastic images. The difference in price between FX and DX glass can be quite high depending upon what you choose. When you buy lenses, please think of them as investments. Quite often we will continue to use the same lenses even if we change or upgrade bodies. Fast glass (lenses with f/2.8 or larger apertures) allow faster shutter speeds to be used while keeping the ISO as low as possible. That can be crucial in low light situations. Fast glass also yields more bokeh when compared with equivalent slower lenses (granted, bokeh is dependent upon the distance between the camera and subject as well as the distance between subject and background). Fast glass can give a razor thin depth of field that isn't available with slower lenses under the same situations. Quite often (but not always) fast lenses tend to have metal mounts. Many of the slower lenses have plastic mounts--especially the newer G lenses. Many people love Tamron's newest 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 lens. It's fast, has their version of vibration reduction, but costs far less than Nikon's 24-70mm VR lens. But here's the thing...you'd be best to decide whether you want to stick with a DX or FX body first. If you start out with a DX body and DX lenses then decide to upgrade to an FX body down the road, you'd be better off getting new FX lenses to go with that FX body. And that will cost you more in the long run. Both a DX and FX body will fill your needs. If you are into birding or macro, then DX would work well. You can do birding or macro with FX, but it might mean adding a teleconverter or extension tubes to yield similar results as you'd get with DX. You have a lot of things to consider. Please be sure to weigh all options to make the best choice for your needs...and desires. FX is excellent and many people have such a strong desire for it...but you need to understand the differences and make an educated choice. Good luck! :encouragement: [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
General Digital SLR Cameras
New -- Recommended Camera & Lenses
Top