Sports photography DX or FX

Welshy74

Senior Member
I am a newbie to the photography world and looks like im going down the road of sports photography. Question I have is that I currently have a D3200 and the longest lens I have seen is 300mm where as the FX I have seen go up to 800. I know they are massively different in price but would I need to go up to FX for the longer lenses as the sports I would be taking photos of would be rugby, football, cricket etc where distance would potentialy be an issue. Thanks for your help
 

Pretzel

Senior Member
1) You can use the Nikon FX lenses on your DX camera (D3200) as long as they're AF-S, otherwise you'll be manually focusing, which will be a challenge in sports photography. ;) The DX is a crop-sensor, so you'll be getting the effective field of view of a lens 1.5x as long, so it actually appears to be getting closer than it would on an FX body. Most of the AMAZING sports pics don't come from the "other" end of the field. You'll notice folks set up in the endzone, on the baseline, etc. and focus on the action coming toward them. If your team is going the other direction, you'll need to be on the other end. Period. Otherwise, your 800mm will be getting a nice zoom in on their backsides anyway... (FWIW, an FX lens will work on either a DX or FX body. A DX lens won't work on an FX body without some forced vignette around the edges. If you plan on EVER moving up to an FX body, buy FX glass to reduce the cost later.)

2) Use what ya got and see how you like it. That 55-300 should give you an effective FOV of 450mm at the long end. See if you can get some decent pics with that, crop to what ya want, and go from there. If you're satisfied with what you're getting, start to invest! I'd suggest shooting in bursts, as it's practically impossible to time the perfect action shot. If you like what you're getting, you'll definitely want to update to a camera body that has a bit faster burst and bigger buffer, and perhaps more cross-type focus points, like a D7100 - 6fps (or D4s - 11fps, woot!). FAST SD cards (like 90 mb/s) are a must!

3) You'll want some faster lenses if you're shooting anything at dusk or night. i.e. 70-200 f2.8 VRII or something similar, and that gets costly. Start planning for that!

4) GOOD LUCK!!!
 
Last edited:

Moab Man

Senior Member
I always go to my DX body first unless it's evening and I need the light collecting and low ISO noise capability of the FX body. Reason for DX first is its inherent reach of being a crop sensor.

Ditto what else was said.
 

Steve B

Senior Member
1) You can use the Nikon FX lenses on your DX camera (D3200) as long as they're AF-S, otherwise you'll be manually focusing, which will be a challenge in sports photography. ;) The DX is a crop-sensor, so you'll be getting the effective field of view of a lens 1.5x as long, so it actually appears to be getting closer than it would on an FX body. Most of the AMAZING sports pics don't come from the "other" end of the field. You'll notice folks set up in the endzone, on the baseline, etc. and focus on the action coming toward them. If your team is going the other direction, you'll need to be on the other end. Period. Otherwise, your 800mm will be getting a nice zoom in on their backsides anyway... (FWIW, an FX lens will work on either a DX or FX body. A DX lens won't work on an FX body without some forced vignette around the edges. If you plan on EVER moving up to an FX body, buy FX glass to reduce the cost later.)

A Nikon DX lens will work fine on a Nikon FX body. Use the Auto DX Crop option or se it manually.
 

kevy73

Senior Member
Personally, I wouldn't care whether it was FX or DX, I would be more concerned about how quickly and accurately my camera can focus on what I am pointing it at.

All of my camera's other than my D4 are seriously slow at times as locking on to the subject. My D4's are just about instantaneous. That is more important to me.

FX lens work fine on DX - you even have the added bonus of a 1.5 crop factor meaning your 400mm FX lens is in fact 600mm - Happy Days. But if your camera body can't focus on what is happening in time then all of that is completely irrelevant.

Edit:
When I say seriously slow - I am in no way shape or form knocking their capability - I love all my camera's. Everything is relative though, the focus speed of the D300 is snail pace compared to the D4. It really is a horses for courses type of equation - photographing fast, constantly changing, constantly moving objects, you need serious fast focusing and / or awesome focus tracking.
 
Last edited:

aced19

Senior Member
I am a newbie to the photography world and looks like im going down the road of sports photography.

Get hooked on drugs. It will be a lot cheaper ;) Just Kidding...

Depends on your budget.
To put it in simple terms. A DX camera with the crop factor will give you more reach than a FX camera with the same lens.
Example if you have a 200mm lens the DX camera will be the equivalent of 300mm. on a FX camera it will be 200mm.
2.8 200mm lens may cost you $1000. But to get the same reach on a FX camera you will have to buy a 300mm lens which might run you $2500 if your lucky.

The plus to a FX camera you will get great image quality and low noise levels at high iso. But you pay for it.

The plus to a DX camera is you don't have to spend a fortune on lenses to get the reach as you do on a FX camera.

If I was you just starting out, I would keep what you have and learn how to shoot with it. As time goes on you will know what you want and need in your next camera.
 

yosser

Senior Member
Think you've got some good answers here and I'd agree with all of them. I'd say if you are starting out though, stick to DX but try and buy lenses that will work on FX id you decide to go that way in the future. You need long lenses for sport most of the time and DX gives you that at a lower price :)

One thing if you don't mind me commenting on them but I looked at your website and you are doing great but you have to get low when shooting rugby or football. Football tends to be shot fom one spot so a little 3 legged folding stool is the right height. For rugby you can tend to move around a bt more so get yourself a monopod and set is so you have to kneel down to use it, plus get a pair of those knee pads carpet fitters use, they make it loads more comfortable and keeps the old trousers dry :)
 

Welshy74

Senior Member
Think you've got some good answers here and I'd agree with all of them. I'd say if you are starting out though, stick to DX but try and buy lenses that will work on FX id you decide to go that way in the future. You need long lenses for sport most of the time and DX gives you that at a lower price :)

Thanks bud, just bought a monopod so hopefully tomorrow if the weather is ok gonna go to my local cricket club

One thing if you don't mind me commenting on them but I looked at your website and you are doing great but you have to get low when shooting rugby or football. Football tends to be shot fom one spot so a little 3 legged folding stool is the right height. For rugby you can tend to move around a bt more so get yourself a monopod and set is so you have to kneel down to use it, plus get a pair of those knee pads carpet fitters use, they make it loads more comfortable and keeps the old trousers dry :)

Thanks bud, just bought a monopod so hopefully tomorrow if the weather is ok gonna go to my local cricket club and have a bit of a practice in different positions and with different settings.
What type of lenses do you mean that work DX and FX?
 

yosser

Senior Member
No worries mate. Basically any lens that hasn't got DX in it's name. The DX means it's been designed for use just on DX (small sensor) cameras and wont work or at least not properly on full frame (FX) cameras. Does that make sense?
 
Top