A DX Body Does Not Increase The "Reach" Of An FX Lens - Change My Mind
Apr 8, 2022 15:11:44 #
BebuLamar wrote:
What is your opinion? If I use the 500mm lens on my Df and crop it to the DX size I would have 6.7MP. If I use the D7200 with the exact same lens I would have a 24MP image. Now which of the 2 images is better in your opinion? I honestly don't know as I don't have a D7200 but I would think the image from the D7200 is better.
Use a D850 and a D500 - then compare. Or if you insist on the D7200, then compare it to a cropped Sony Alpha 7R IV - then compare.
Apr 8, 2022 15:12:12 #
Like a small tossed salad...
Same salad,
tossed just as high,
simply caught in smaller bowl.
Same salad,
tossed just as high,
simply caught in smaller bowl.
Apr 8, 2022 15:12:43 #
MJPerini wrote:
Maybe we could take up a collection and Pay these people to stop.......
One the other hand, it might encourage them, so use the money to hire an editor to excise these questions
One the other hand, it might encourage them, so use the money to hire an editor to excise these questions
Your cash aint nothing but trash
Apr 8, 2022 15:16:09 #
larryepage wrote:
The 8 pages of discussion here would seem to indicate that confusion is greater than understanding on this topic.
Apr 8, 2022 15:20:23 #
Bill_de wrote:
Too late. That argument is over. JPG is best for good results. 
---
---
and... we are off and running! LOL!
Apr 8, 2022 16:03:46 #
Gene51 wrote:
Use a D850 and a D500 - then compare. Or if you insist on the D7200, then compare it to a cropped Sony Alpha 7R IV - then compare.
You didn't see my second post.
Apr 8, 2022 18:31:47 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
CHG_CANON wrote:
You really can't argue with ignorance.
Paul, you seem to sum this up nicely.
My head hurts now.
Apr 8, 2022 19:21:03 #
BlackRipleyDog wrote:
The Common Fallacy - Putting an FX lens on a DX (C... (show quote)
You should have used example images of the same scene, using the same lens on a DX and FX body.
If you look through the viewfinder, a subject in the DX viewfinder will fill more of the frame. Hence, "reach".
If you compare a high MP FX with a typical DX, you will be able to crop the image to similar magnification. But you didn't get to see the subject better with the FX, as you can with the DX. Hence, "reach"
With modern high MP FF mirrorless, you can set the image to DX mode, and see the same magnification. In that case, the DX camera doesn't have more "reach"; it is the same magnification as can be gotten with the FF. If you do that iwth a normal MP FF mirrorless, then you lose resolution. But you still get the same "reach".
Thus, a DX body increases the "reach" of an FX lens while using the camera, and perhaps while processing the image.
Apr 8, 2022 20:02:48 #
jcboy3 wrote:
You should have used example images of the same sc... (show quote)
Nope, still not buying it.
Apr 8, 2022 20:13:48 #
It’s really simple. Whatever lens you have is effectively 1,5x as long on a DX body. What that means is that …on a DX body you will get more pixels on target than the same lens on a same size pixel body. Now the FX body at same pixel size has some noise and IQ benefits because of the larger pixel size…potentially…than a DX body…but more pixels on target means better detail on the subject. If you compare it to a higher MP body…then it becomes a different calculation because the higher MP FX body has the same size pixels so basically…minor differences aside…there is not much difference between them…and the benefits sort of cancel each other out.
None of tha5 should really affect your choice between a DX body and an FX body…think of other things like size, weight, features, and whatnot…including budget…when making the decision about which way to go.
None of tha5 should really affect your choice between a DX body and an FX body…think of other things like size, weight, features, and whatnot…including budget…when making the decision about which way to go.
Apr 8, 2022 20:23:35 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
Exactly. But if the DX sensor has the same number of pixels as the FX sensor, to get the same image with the FX camera with the same pixel density as the DX with that lens would require a lens on the FX camera with 1.5 x the focal length. Of course, the FX and DX cameras probably don't have the same number of pixels in their sensors, so the question is moot.Actually, as expressed in this thread, nothing actually looks larger. The exact same focal length image exists in both the FX and DX version of the same image from the same lens. You just see less of the image circle from the DX crop. Or, are you under this Reach spell?
Apr 8, 2022 20:54:03 #
Apr 8, 2022 21:38:37 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
BlackRipleyDog wrote:
Nope, still not buying it.
What you buy or not is inconsequential. If a DX Body puts more pixels on the subject than a 1.5X crop of the FX body image then the DX body increases the "reach" of the same lens (same focal length) on the FX body. That frequently occurs and when it does "reach" is real. Proof: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-734935-6.html#13058291
Prove otherwise.
Apr 8, 2022 22:00:56 #
Apr 9, 2022 00:06:30 #
Nope. And you’re pretty much a master.
—Bob
—Bob
User ID wrote:
Trolling aint new.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.