D600 vs d7100

Started Apr 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,788
Like?
Re: "It is better, because image circle is larger" - enough said
In reply to sshoihet, May 15, 2013

sshoihet wrote:

The biggest flaw in the argument is that not everyone requires the equivalence (that one really seems to be popular lately) of FX on DX.

But the rest of your argument is based on equivalent conditions.

Not everyone needs to work at large apertures with razor thin dof.  Not everyone needs the extra ~stop of low light performance.

It isnt always about needs, it is also about wants, FF gives you that option.

Many of us want more dof and that is what constrains us.

what you mean more DOF? it is pretty easy to get infinite DOF for wide angle lenses.

In many cases, FX loses it's benefit here because you need to stop down an additional stop to get the same dof.

no Dr or resolution benefit if you are on base iso.

Many of the cheaper lenses are horrible on the edges too when shot wide open and you have to stop down if you need good edge-edge sharpness anyway.

Exactly, so with FF you may well end up saving money because you stop down the cheap lenses to get sufficient DOF

I needed a second body recently and after much consideration i ended up getting the D7100 over the D600. I would have picked up a D700 but couldn't find one at the time. Why did I buy the D7100?  Not because of price but because I felt that by buying the D600 I was giving up too many features just to get a larger sensor and it wasn't worth it to me.

Why would you not have lost them if you got D700?

FX and DX both have benefits and there is no reason that they have to be equivalent; not being equivalent means that in many cases, DX is cheaper.

I dont think you understood that equivalent means.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow