D600 vs d7100

Started Apr 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
d3xmeister Veteran Member • Posts: 3,380
Re: "It is better, because image circle is larger" - enough said

The only true phenomenon in his clueless story is:

The D7100 has ,,pixels,, roughly twice as small than the D600. That means a lens should be able to resolve twice the resolution on the D7100 to get you the same resolution as on the D600. Some lenses can, most lenses cannot really, but that doesn't mean they are twice as bad, only if their maximum resolution would be 24MP on FX. That would make them useless on a D800 or any future cameras. So there are lenses that get you same resolution on both cameras, some that will do better on the D600, some will come very close, and some that will be rubbish on both cameras.

But lens resolution is not everything. In fact many agree that is not even the most important thing. Good lenses have many qualities over cheap lenses. They have much better separation (not DOF), nice colours, micro contrast, bokeh quality etc, edge performance. They also have better T-Stop, which means they let more light in than cheaper lenses, even at the same aperture. And there is also the mechanical build, durability, the autofocus, how manual focus works etc.

That's why Ultimitsu is plain wrong. He said that an old, second hand, cheap, plastic, low-end, amateur level third party lens is better than a pro level high quality lens, just because you mount it on FX. That is just rubbish.

I used the FX Nikon D700 and the DX Nikon D300. Yes the D700 was a better camera in IQ, but only if you mounted the same lenses. I borrowed a sigma 28-70mm and it was rubbish on both bodies. The same with a Tamron 70-200mm. Had a 70-300mm VR and borrowed a Nikon 70-200mm. The D300 + 70-200mm f/2.8 combo was blowing away the D700 + 70-300mm VR combo in every way. The 70-200mm f/2.8 had much better edges and less vignetting on DX, and it was about the same in the centre. But you did get about 1.5 stops of low light performance from the D700.

Also worth mentioning the FX only have an advantage in low light if you can afford to lose DOF. For example I was shooting my two kids at my house yesterday. After a few shots I realised I would need at least f/4 on DX to get them both in focus. FF would not help in this situation, because I would need to stop down to f/5.6 to get the same DOF. So FF would have no advantage if you need DOF. What helped a lot was a SB-900 remotely triggered.

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