Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RocketCowboy" data-source="post: 525618" data-attributes="member: 25095">But 24mm on an FX lens is the same as 24mm on a DX lens, regardless of camera body. The &quot;effective zoom&quot; comes from DX body. Focal lengths on both FX and DX dedicated lenses represents the true focal length and not the field of view offered by the body.My 55-300mm Nikon DX lens does not provide a true 300mm FOV on any DX body, it's still an effective 450mm FOV. The only difference is the size of the image displayed across the focal plane where the sensor is mounted. Focal length is focal length regardless, and the FOV is specific to the sensor format itself. When using a DX lens on an FX camera, the sensor is not completely covered so MP is reduced, but the reverse is not the case. The benefit to DX glass on DX bodies is all about weight savings and not projecting a larger image than the sensor will handle.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RocketCowboy, post: 525618, member: 25095"] But 24mm on an FX lens is the same as 24mm on a DX lens, regardless of camera body. The "effective zoom" comes from DX body. Focal lengths on both FX and DX dedicated lenses represents the true focal length and not the field of view offered by the body. My 55-300mm Nikon DX lens does not provide a true 300mm FOV on any DX body, it's still an effective 450mm FOV. The only difference is the size of the image displayed across the focal plane where the sensor is mounted. Focal length is focal length regardless, and the FOV is specific to the sensor format itself. When using a DX lens on an FX camera, the sensor is not completely covered so MP is reduced, but the reverse is not the case. The benefit to DX glass on DX bodies is all about weight savings and not projecting a larger image than the sensor will handle. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk [/QUOTE]

Verification