Questions on adding FX camera (D600) to current kit

gustafson

Senior Member
My current kit consists of two DX cameras (D3300 & D7100) and an assortment of DX and older (mostly vintage manual and some non AF-S) FX lenses listed in my signature. I started thinking about acquiring an FX body on realizing that I was not getting the best out of the wider end of my FX lenses due to the DX crop factor (see my previous post: http://nikonites.com/general-digita...hasing-full-frame-dslr-body-2.html#post541236). Based on advice from fellow Nikonites, I've been keeping an eye out for used D6x0's, and may have found an affordable used one. However, before making the leap, I thought it a good idea to seek guidance on a few questions that are nagging me:


  • Is it crazy to own a DX and FX camera at the same time? Hoping to hear pros / cons from others that do (or have at some point). My rationale is that I'd use the D7100 primarily with my vintage telephoto / long-portrait FX lenses (mated, if needed, with my modified TC-16a for pseudo-AF), and the D6x0 with the wideangle and normal / short-portrait lenses.
  • Follow-up to the above, how would vintage FX manual & (pre AF-S) AF lenses perform on a D6x0 as opposed to a D7100? (I understand that DX sensors can exploit the sweet spot of FX lenses. However, I'm wondering whether there are any benefits of FX vs. DX from a resolution standpoint with these older lenses)
  • Are there any other considerations that come to mind? Hoping to hear from those among you who rock (or have in the past) a DX-FX combo.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
I have both. I reach for the D600 for low-light stuff, and the D300 for pretty much everything else... I have such a wide range of lenses, that I don't particularly notice or focus on which one is best suited (other than ISO performance) for a particular task.
 

gustafson

Senior Member
I have both. I reach for the D600 for low-light stuff, and the D300 for pretty much everything else... I have such a wide range of lenses, that I don't particularly notice or focus on which one is best suited (other than ISO performance) for a particular task.

Thanks for your useful insight. I haven't yet bumped up against the limitations of the D7100 in low-light, so seems like I should hold off on FX for now until that becomes an issue.

I've been trying to understand whether older FX lenses have enough resolution to do justice to 24MP DX and FX sensors, and was hoping someone on here could point me to relevant information on that topic.
 

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
Goto DXOMark... you can select different camera bodies and compare the data with your existing lenses/body combo...

You don't have to bump up to a limitation such as low light to see a difference... the difference can be as simple as using ambient light to effect a particular mood that's difficult to achieve with added lighting...
 

480sparky

Senior Member
I jumped from a D60 to a D7000 to a D600. I sold off all my DX stuff (D7000 and DX glass) to fund a second D600. I thought I had forsaken DX forever.

Then the D7100 and the Tamron 150-600 came out. I backpedaled into DX for the crop factor and have since exchanged the Tamron with a Nikkor 200-500 with a 1.4 TC. I use it for sports, wildlife and anything that needs raw focal length. The D7100 and D600s are virtually identical in terms of size and control layout. So it's easy to put one down and pick up the other. They also use the same batteries. Even the battery trays for the grips are interchangeable.

DX is a tool, just like FX. They are different, and they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Used properly, they both are very capable.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
One thing worth mentioning is that if you can find an FX that uses the same battery as your DX, you'll be thankful. Interchanging batteries and chargers is worth considering before you get your mind set on one particular model. I know because I have the D7000, D700 and Df which all have different battery and charger. I certainly wish batteries could just be swapped between all my cameras.

But the upgrade to FX is worth it specially for the wider range and the low noise produced by high iso shots.
 

gustafson

Senior Member
I jumped from a D60 to a D7000 to a D600. I sold off all my DX stuff (D7000 and DX glass) to fund a second D600. I thought I had forsaken DX forever.

Then the D7100 and the Tamron 150-600 came out. I backpedaled into DX for the crop factor and have since exchanged the Tamron with a Nikkor 200-500 with a 1.4 TC. I use it for sports, wildlife and anything that needs raw focal length. The D7100 and D600s are virtually identical in terms of size and control layout. So it's easy to put one down and pick up the other. They also use the same batteries. Even the battery trays for the grips are interchangeable.

DX is a tool, just like FX. They are different, and they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Used properly, they both are very capable.

Thanks for sharing your journey, very helpful. Did you buy any DX glass after getting your D7100?
 
One thing worth mentioning is that if you can find an FX that uses the same battery as your DX, you'll be thankful. Interchanging batteries and chargers is worth considering before you get your mind set on one particular model. I know because I have the D7000, D700 and Df which all have different battery and charger. I certainly wish batteries could just be swapped between all my cameras.

But the upgrade to FX is worth it specially for the wider range and the low noise produced by high iso shots.

My D7100 and D750 both use the same battery. I have 5 batteries for the 2 of them. It sure is nice when my wife and I are both out shooting.
 
I haven't yet bumped up against the limitations of the D7100 in low-light, so seems like I should hold off on FX for now until that becomes an issue.

I don't know about the D600 but there is an amazing difference in the low light capabilities of the D7100 and the D750. Shadow details can be brought out much better without noise. Shooting at much higher ISO in very low light areas is so much better. I thought the D7100 did a great job when I was shooting it but really saw the difference once I got the D750.

Don't get me wrong, I still love my D7100.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I would suggest a used D610 over a used D600. The latter had sensor spot issues, and although bodies were sent in for repair (shutter replacement), many people still encountered the same issue...myself included. I still have a D610 even though I also have a D750--and I make use of my D610 because I really like it.
 

gustafson

Senior Member
I don't know about the D600 but there is an amazing difference in the low light capabilities of the D7100 and the D750. Shadow details can be brought out much better without noise. Shooting at much higher ISO in very low light areas is so much better. I thought the D7100 did a great job when I was shooting it but really saw the difference once I got the D750.

Don't get me wrong, I still love my D7100.

My understanding is the D750 is like the D6x0 on steroids: better AF engine and better low-light capability, but for me personally, way over my budget. A used D6x0 runs about $600-900 on the bay, while a used D750 is 2-2.5x the price (and arguably worth the premium).
 

gustafson

Senior Member
I would suggest a used D610 over a used D600. The latter had sensor spot issues, and although bodies were sent in for repair (shutter replacement), many people still encountered the same issue...myself included. I still have a D610 even though I also have a D750--and I make use of my D610 because I really like it.

Thanks for the heads up! I've read conflicting accounts of the D600 sensor issues, but sobering to hear it first hand. Guess I'll pass on the D600 that I was getting and hold out for a D610. Could you weigh in on the pros and cons of the D610 vs. D750 based on day to day use? Great to hear that you're happy with your D610!
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
My D600 has been problem free since day 1, although I did send it back under voluntary recall. I started out in DX (D100 then D7000) and moved to FF with the D600, then D750. Bought the D7200 to replace my aging D7000 for use with the 200-500 lens. So I use DX for reach and FX for everything else. All bodies use the same battery and all have basically the same layout. I have no DX lenses.
 

gustafson

Senior Member
My D600 has been problem free since day 1, although I did send it back under voluntary recall. I started out in DX (D100 then D7000) and moved to FF with the D600, then D750. Bought the D7200 to replace my aging D7000 for use with the 200-500 lens. So I use DX for reach and FX for everything else. All bodies use the same battery and all have basically the same layout. I have no DX lenses.

Thanks for sharing, sounds a bit like 480sparky's journey, and helps crystallize my decision. Since you've owned both the D750 and the D600, would you support acquiring a D6x0 as opposed to holding out for a D750? Are the reported trade-offs to the D750 (inferior AF and low-light performance) livable with, and are there any other trade offs that you found to be material? Thanks in advance!
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
Thanks for sharing, sounds a bit like 480sparky's journey, and helps crystallize my decision. Since you've owned both the D750 and the D600, would you support acquiring a D6x0 as opposed to holding out for a D750? Are the reported trade-offs to the D750 (inferior AF and low-light performance) livable with, and are there any other trade offs that you found to be material? Thanks in advance!

I shoot a lot of events and the D600 was a bit lacking in low light AF. The 750 took care of that. I still use the D600 when I shoot with 2 bodies (or 3). The 750 has some other nice features, flippy screen, WiFi, etc., but I don't know if it's worth twice the price of a D600.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Thanks for the heads up! I've read conflicting accounts of the D600 sensor issues, but sobering to hear it first hand. Guess I'll pass on the D600 that I was getting and hold out for a D610. Could you weigh in on the pros and cons of the D610 vs. D750 based on day to day use? Great to hear that you're happy with your D610!

The D750 has a more improved sensor which offers about a stop more of ISO performance over the D610, but my D610 is still much better in that respect than my D7100. I haven't experienced any AF problems with any of my bodies unless the light is very, very low. And there is always the option to switch to Live View and focus manually in those situations.

The top display is a little different between the D610 and D750--tends to be easier to read on the D750 because the letters are larger. I don't do birding, sports, or anything else that requires quick AF and/or reaction time so I can't help you there.

The benefits of DX are that the 1.5 crop sensor will work to your advantage when using telephoto lenses. You will get more reach with DX than FX if you are using the same lens on both bodies. And the other advantage is for macro photography for the same reason--the subject will fill the viewfinder better with DX than FX. Extension tubes run around $140 for anyone who is interested in FX macro (they can also be used on DX if needed), and since I have them, my macro end is covered on FX. I don't yet have a teleconverter, but birding or other shots that involve really long telephoto lenses don't tend to be things I shoot. Landscapes are my main interest.

Lately I seem to be doing a lot of shooting that involves ISO 1600-2500 (low enough light where shutter speeds need to be fast enough to eliminate blur from people's movements). Both my D610 and D750 work well--and both outperform my D7100 in those situations.

I started out using 35mm film long ago and was annoyed with the 1.5 crop factor. Personally I much prefer FX over DX, but as I listed above, there are times when DX has its advantages. Fortunately I have both DX and FX bodies. You need to decide which body will work best for you. If you think there will come a time to switch to FX, then that's what you should consider providing it falls within your budget. Making the decision may not be easy because you will keep second guessing yourself. Weigh the pros and cons of DX vs FX and make an informed decision. Good luck!
 
Last edited:

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Piling on and apologizing if I repeat anything that's been said.

First off, what do you shoot? I have a need for both DX and FX because of my wildlife photography. With my D7100 for sale I've been want to put clicks on it so I've been shooting with my D750 while waiting for my D500 to ship and I miss the 50% bump in focal length equivalence.

I've had the D7000, D7100, D600, D610 and D750. The D610 is the same camera as the D600 from a sensor perspective - they just upgraded the shutter and added a Quiet Continuous mode which I use all the time (I would strongly recommend the 610 just to avoid potential nonsense - I went through two D600's that Nikon eventually upgraded to 610's). From an IQ point of view there's not a huge difference between the D7100 and the D600/610 in my opinion. The FX camera will do better has you get over ISO 1600, but the lack of OLPF on the D7100 makes it incredibly sharp. There are situational trade-offs, but given your lack of modern AF-S glass for FX the upgrade doesn't make sense to me unless you plan on upgrading glass as well.

Now, the D750? That's an upgrade worth making, if your shooting style will accommodate a switch in formats. In general that means that if you're not shooting sports or wildlife then different format just means different glass. You'll be spending some money on both, but I can promise you that there is an appreciable difference. Wait for the next FX body to come out and grab a refurb D750 when the prices drop. Until then, save for it and for the glass you'll want with it.
 

gustafson

Senior Member
Just wanted to thank everyone for the insightful responses in this thread. This is a topic (using a DX-FX combo, that is, and specifically the D7100-D6x0 and the D7100-D750 combos) that is not well threshed out in the public domain, and your responses have been incredibly helpful in helping me make a decision.

For now, I plan to pass up on the D600 deal that I have access to, and instead shoot with the D7100 for a few more months before revisiting whether to add an FX body and newer FX lenses to the stable.

The question now is what to do with the 28 f2.8 Ai-s that I paid dearly for Didn't realize it at the time, but clearly an acute episode of GAS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top