Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="aroy" data-source="post: 554789" data-attributes="member: 16090">Better DR also translates to better noise, especially when shooting low light or recovering shadows. I shoot a lot in high DR situations - harsh light deep shadows, and find that the amount of information you can get from the shadows depends largely on the DR of the sensor. Just remember that as you increase ISO, you are decreasing the DR, which means you will have less latitude in recovering shadows. That is why I rarely go beyond ISO 400 in D3300, while with D750 I could get the same latitude in shadow recovery at ISO 1600 or more. That is a great improvement. If you do not want to recover shadows then ISO 12500 will give clean images in well exposed regions, difficult to match in D7xxx bodies.Another reason for going FX is that the wide lenses will have a wider FOV, so the FOV of a 16mm on DX will be matched by 24mm in FX, and 14mm on FX will just not be there in DX (9.3mm) short of fisheye lenses.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="aroy, post: 554789, member: 16090"] Better DR also translates to better noise, especially when shooting low light or recovering shadows. I shoot a lot in high DR situations - harsh light deep shadows, and find that the amount of information you can get from the shadows depends largely on the DR of the sensor. Just remember that as you increase ISO, you are decreasing the DR, which means you will have less latitude in recovering shadows. That is why I rarely go beyond ISO 400 in D3300, while with D750 I could get the same latitude in shadow recovery at ISO 1600 or more. That is a great improvement. If you do not want to recover shadows then ISO 12500 will give clean images in well exposed regions, difficult to match in D7xxx bodies. Another reason for going FX is that the wide lenses will have a wider FOV, so the FOV of a 16mm on DX will be matched by 24mm in FX, and 14mm on FX will just not be there in DX (9.3mm) short of fisheye lenses. [/QUOTE]

Verification