BrettProbert Loc: Clinton, PA

I have some pixels for sale in the buy/sell forum. Great deal!

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

You're better off with the TC, shooting with a crop camera or cropping/pixel enlargement in post.

mawyatt Loc: Clearwater, Florida

Steve Perry has a great review of this subject, DX vs FX with 1.4X Teleconverter.

http://backcountrygallery.com

Best,

Mike

Shellback Loc: North of Cheyenne Bottoms Wetlands - Kansas

I have the 610 also and tried that - I found that I was not happy with the results... Also, reading more in the manual, you will find that your 24 Mpix just dropped to approx 11 Mpix...

I have a 7000 that I use - picked it up cheap and it's 16 Mpix with the built in 1.5 factor...

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

No such thing as a free lunch.

Yes, cropping will give you the illusion of a longer focal length because you are reducing the angle of view. I do it all the time.
No, with a good 1.4X TC you are not likely to see the 5% loss of image quality on a sharp 300mm F2.8 lens. But you will see it if you are using a 28-300, 70-300, or any of the other slow zooms, because they are often weakest at their longest focal length.

Cropping in camera is less desirable than cropping in post processing, especially if you are shooting active subjects. With a hard crop in camera you may cut off part of the subject, that you might otherwise be able to have if your subject is off center and you are cropping in post.

A cropped image has fewer pixels, and must be magnified more (50% more) when you make a print, compared to an uncropped image made with a longer lens to make an image with the same field of view.

If you have a modest 300mm, I would not suggest cropping or using a 1.4X TC, but using a crop sensor camera "may" offer a slight advantage. You still have to magnify the image 50%, but you can get a 24mp crop camera that would record more fine detail than a D610 cropped to DX - 3,936 x 2,624 or 10 mp.


Here is a pair of images from a pretty sharp Sigma 150-600 Sport, taken at F8 (sharpest aperture), using a 36mp D800, taken earlier today. The first image is uncropped, 7360x4910. The second is an extreme crop, down to 1682x2277, or 3.8 mp. The crop still has enough fine detail and pixels to make a 12x18 and appear reasonably sharp.

As an FYI, if I had used a D610 and cropped the image down 90% my result would be only 2.5 mp, and it would lack the fine detail you see in the 3.8mp crop.

(Download)


(Download)

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

This will produce a decent image, but it won't add back any fine detail not captured. The image will have a sharp clean look with crisp edge definition, but really small stuff is going to be mush.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Sorry, but you will loose on both, because that crop comes at the cost of pixels and you'll also loose the light that goes with those pixels!!

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

You might as well just shoot full frame and crop later. You don't have to worry about composing as precisely, you have more leeway on how to crop it. you might even decide that the equivalent of less than 450 might be better.

BebuLamar

You instantly convert your 24MP camera to 10.5MP camera. And if you compare such an image with an image from the lesser D7200 and with the same lens. The D7200 would yield better image.
What you did is very economically sound because you throw away the larger part of your sensor which you paid in the purchase price of the D610.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Nothing is going to ADD - the most you can hope is to minimize LOSSES .....

Haydon

Way to go Larry, you mentioned pixel enlargement this time :)

BebuLamar

It would be a better tip not to use the FX to DX even if you are using a DX lens. All the cropping and be done in post and can be more selective.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

This should be an eye opener for many people !

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Exactly!