Brandon, -- I think the real issue and the source of controversy here is that people look at DX and FX cameras from the perspective of "what do I get from it with a given lens". Obviously, a given lens won't behave the same. But still, which of the two systems is preferable depends highly on what you shoot and what you're trying to achieve. One size doesn't fit all circumstances. Clearly some people are entitled to feel that for their particular purposes either DX or FX works better. As Kerry remarked above, -- and I fully agree with him, -- it is preferable to have access to at least one DX and one FX camera. So, IMO it is entirely legitimate to desire a DX camera built to the same standard as the upper level FX offerings. Canon does get it, and whether one likes 7DII or not, it is hard to argue against having good options to choose from.The main advantage is that you can trade depth of field for iso when you choose. And then the IQ is better. I can't say for the birds I shoot that I often increase DOF when using a 300mm f2.8. Large near birds maybe. The main disadvantage is that the lenses are larger usually but as I said somewhere else in practice in the field the resolution of the D810 is no different to a D7100 with the same high quality glass.Let's look at it this way. If I use 300/4 on FX and 200/2.8 on DX I get pretty much the same everything, FOV, DOF, right? I also let twice as much light in on DX, so I can have a stop lower ISO for the same shutter speed. So, at this point what's the main advantage of FX ?Craig,All things considered, as far as IQ you only sacrifice about 1 stop or thereabouts going from FX to DX of the same generation. Depending on what you're shooting the other advantages may well outweigh this one stop. I shoot with both DX and FX, and there are circumstances when I prefer D300 to D3s despite at least 2 stop difference between the two. There is no magic in FX, you gain something, you give something else.
The only advantage is that under certain situations where you have to crop anyway, DX can put more pixels on the target, all else being equal. In those situations, I'd personally rather manually do my cropping in post. I have better control that way. That's why I'd never put an FX camera in crop mode, as well. I might decide to use an off-center crop later. Make sense?
Take care.
--
Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile - f/22 Club Member
I reserve the right to make mistakes in reasoning and logic as well as to change my mind anytime I wish. I also ask forbearance with respect to my typos. Please take a look at my gallery here at DPR.
what do you mean "only". One stop means twice the shutter speed or half the aperture can give similar IQ. In this world of marginal differences 100% improvements in shutter speed or Aperture are huge!
Also this thing about pixels on bird. The one stop lower iso D810 pixels because they have better DR (less noise) are at least as good at detail retention as the pixels on a D7100 in all but best light and in a lab. So there is really no gain for DX same generation over FX as far as resolution is concerned.
Last edited:
