Going FF(?)

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Elti87
Forum MemberPosts: 68
Like?
Re: Going FF(?)
In reply to Rexgig0, 2 months ago

Rexgig0 wrote:

Elti87 wrote:

dgc4rter wrote:

I recently purchased a D610 for my travel solution (traded in an Olympus EM-5). Being the smallest and lightest of Nikon's FF offerings (roughly the same size as a D7100) it was the logical choice as I already have a D800E and a set of Nikkor lenses.

Once you see and experience full frame, it's difficult to accept or be satisfied with anything else in terms of IQ which is why the EM-5 had to go (I found the controls too small and fiddly also). The D610 fits nicely in the hands, even better with the MB-D14 grip, and is a joy to use. However, coming from a D7000, I'm sure you are well acquainted with the ergonomics.

As for lenses, I will use my 50mm f1.8 G and 24-85mm VR on trips. Both are (relatively) light and compact lenses and give excellent results. Not as good as the 24-70 but that's just too big and heavy (and expensive) for me as a travel lens. However, I've toyed with the idea of getting the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VR which is half the price and gets very good reviews. Maybe sometime in the not too distant future.

The D610 is a superb camera and certainly gives the most bang for your buck of any FF DSLR to date. You will not look back.

Don't you feel that your "range" got hurt once you moved to FF? I mean, what was 105*1.6 before is now just 105mm. (But I guess you just crop more often?)

Focal length is focal length. Using FX, (or 35mm film) as compared to DX, simply means the crop factor is not there. It does not affect "range." The apparent magnification occurs when one enlarges the resulting cropped image to fill one's computer monitor, or enlarges to a specific print size. One gets better "range" by using a higher-resolution sensor, so that when the cropped image is enlarged to the desired size, resolution does not "fall apart."

Where are you getting a 1.6x crop factor? This is not the Canon forum. Nikon DX camera have a 1.5x crop factor. Though both are generally termed as being APS-C, the Nikon sensor is just a bit larger in area. (This is not a jab at Canon; I enjoy using Canons, too, including the in-between 1.3x-crop APS-H 1D-series sports/wildlife cameras.)

I like FX because my lenses, at least the ones with focal lengths shorter than telephoto, behave as they do on 35mm film, and FX cameras have nice, large viewfinders for better manual focusing. FX is Nikon's term for a digital sensor the same size as a "full" 35mm film negative. DX is the smaller digital sensor with a 1.5x crop factor.

-- hide signature --

I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.

1.6 was a typo. Spare my life, master

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