donaldjledet
Senior Member
Question I have being a newbie is if you have a dx cacameras s looking for a second camera ,Why would you get a full frame and not another DX camera?
Dx camera full frame.
- Thread starter donaldjledet
- Start date
I went from a DX D7000 to the FX D800 because:
I wanted the best sensor on the market
I wanted the latest technologies
I already owned a number of FX lenses, not just DX lenses
I don't shoot much at longer focal lengths so the extra "reach" of DX wasn't an advantage to me.
Mfrankfort
Senior Member
I went from DX to FX. Bigger is better. 
haha. I like the "extra" you get without the crop. Plus with the bigger sensor, you get better low light performance, since the sensor can get more light. If your shooting a lot of things where you zoom a lot.. like 200mm +... DX might be better because of the "reach". Landscapes or anything else where you want wide angle, or low light.. .FX is the way to go in my opinion.
haha. I like the "extra" you get without the crop. Plus with the bigger sensor, you get better low light performance, since the sensor can get more light. If your shooting a lot of things where you zoom a lot.. like 200mm +... DX might be better because of the "reach". Landscapes or anything else where you want wide angle, or low light.. .FX is the way to go in my opinion.
nikonpup: very reasonable thinking!
Hi Donald,
Your question being: If I have a DX camera, should a second camera be a DX or FX?
If want to learn photography and you do not have the ambition of publishing or being published,
If you own DX lenses already and none of the FX line,
Then, stay in DX!
The worse thing that can happen is to duplicate lenses because you have two formats.
For you, I suggest to expand your system, thus your possibilities, in the DX format:
telelens, wider lens, even macro, anything you want… but in one format.
I teach my sons the same principles but for them, the format will be FX because ALL
my gear is in FX.
The worse thing that can happen is to duplicate lenses because you have two formats.
Vbrg,
Hi Donald,
Your question being: If I have a DX camera, should a second camera be a DX or FX?
If want to learn photography and you do not have the ambition of publishing or being published,
If you own DX lenses already and none of the FX line,
Then, stay in DX!
The worse thing that can happen is to duplicate lenses because you have two formats.
For you, I suggest to expand your system, thus your possibilities, in the DX format:
telelens, wider lens, even macro, anything you want… but in one format.
I teach my sons the same principles but for them, the format will be FX because ALL
my gear is in FX.
The worse thing that can happen is to duplicate lenses because you have two formats.
Vbrg,
Last edited:
donaldjledet
Senior Member
Well thanks guys for the replies. Yea as of now I have one dx glass,one fx glass.My dx is the 35mm 1.8 fx is the 70-300 4.5-5.6.
So if i understand right the dx glass will work in low light and up. I'm mostly shooting my grand kids, horse racing, and some wildlife.
and some city stuff. So there is ready no need to go fx. cause the dx will get me what i want which is sharp and vivid color photos.
So if i understand right the dx glass will work in low light and up. I'm mostly shooting my grand kids, horse racing, and some wildlife.
and some city stuff. So there is ready no need to go fx. cause the dx will get me what i want which is sharp and vivid color photos.
A lot of good advice already!
I switched from the D5100 to the D600 last year and I'm very pleased with the change;however, I did take a hit trading my Dx glass. Pixel density is much lower in Fx (with the exception of the D800) resulting in better low light performance and less noise at comparable ISO settings. You need to look at the pixel density when comparing the two formats. The Fx sensor is about 2.4 times larger than Dx, so if both have 24mp, the Fx sensor is much less dense which should translate into better low light performance.
In analyzing my own shots at 100%, I could see noticeable differences between my Dx and Fx bodies. As mentioned, it really depends on what you're going to do with the images and your ultimate photographic goals. I knew going Fx would gnaw at me until I made the change.
Now I have all Fx glass, I have been thinking of picking up a 24mp Dx body for the crop factor. The D600 cropped is only about 10.6 mp. This may double the usefulness of all my lenses and give me a bit more perceived "reach".
I switched from the D5100 to the D600 last year and I'm very pleased with the change;however, I did take a hit trading my Dx glass. Pixel density is much lower in Fx (with the exception of the D800) resulting in better low light performance and less noise at comparable ISO settings. You need to look at the pixel density when comparing the two formats. The Fx sensor is about 2.4 times larger than Dx, so if both have 24mp, the Fx sensor is much less dense which should translate into better low light performance.
In analyzing my own shots at 100%, I could see noticeable differences between my Dx and Fx bodies. As mentioned, it really depends on what you're going to do with the images and your ultimate photographic goals. I knew going Fx would gnaw at me until I made the change.
Now I have all Fx glass, I have been thinking of picking up a 24mp Dx body for the crop factor. The D600 cropped is only about 10.6 mp. This may double the usefulness of all my lenses and give me a bit more perceived "reach".
Last edited:
donaldjledet
Senior Member
So far what I'm doing right now. My next two nikkor glass would be the 18-105mm 3.5-5.6 and a wide angle say the nikkor 10-24 3.5 or something like the 16-85 3.5
Again thanks for the feedback.
Again thanks for the feedback.