Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Allen ... Sigma has a couple of zoom lenses they label as "Macro" ... one is the 18-250 OS HSM Macro - which can engage 1:2.9 at ANY length ...

The other is the 70-300 APO Macro - which can lock in 1:2.9 at 200mm ... then allows variable macro up through 300mm - when it becomes 1:2 ...

Tamron used to sell an 18-200 XR Macro .... which also could engage 1:2.9 at any length ....

Unfortunately, now, though - they've removed that one from the market ....

However, Sigma still sells BOTH of THEIR "Macro" Zooms .... and - thank goodness!!!!!

Dossile

A great discussion. Some strong opinions, a few even seem factual. As someone who enjoys many different types of photography, I moved to a full frame sensor for several reasons. I was not always talented enough in my composition. A full frame allowed me to crop in PP without loss of definition and in a manner far different than shooting with my DX. A full frame also allowed me to take better wide angle landscape and cityscape photographs with, in my opinion, better lenses than a DX (less chromatic aberration, barrel distortion). If almost all I did was take pictures of birds, a Nikon 7500 or 500 would be high on my list. Great cameras. But relative magnification is required in such a small part of what I enjoy. I am an enthusiast who enjoys travel, Macro, landscapes, wildlife and sports photography. I love candid portraits at family gatherings. I am a published medical photographer. I own a few businesses and use my camera to fill up space on our websites with candid employee photographs. I’ve taken a lot of really horrible pictures with DX, a mirrorless micro 4/3, a couple of cannon point and shoots and now Nikon FX cameras. I’ve also taken a lot of pictures that I love with each. My favorite picture of all time was with a cheap point and shoot. If I bought a Nikon 500 it would be because it is light and fast, but never because I was under the illusion that a DX sensor is superior to a high pixel FX sensor, unless judged with very narrow parameters.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Everything's relative, Dos ... there are some who might quibble with you about the D500 being "light" ... although, not the D7500 ....

Just curious, Dos ... what camera do you use most, when doing medical photography?

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

Sorry for the confusion, yes I did mean the Nikon D850.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Ah, I see, Go ...

Since you just wrote "850" and were talking about 24MP ... I assumed you meant the Sony a850 ...

The Nikon D850 has a 46MP sensor ... not sure how that relates to 24MP ....

Hank Radt

Bill_de Loc: US

Chris,

I was just asking what you did with you photos before you had any software.

--

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

I get how my comment can be confusing, I should have made it a little clearer before posting. The resolution of the D850, when cropped to the size of a DX sensor is roughly the same as current crop cameras of today. The point I was trying to make was that the advantages of a DX crop are contained by nature in the D850 sensor.

Hank Radt

Your post was clear...

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

And, just WHAT are those advantages, Go?

Anyone who puts down $3,300.00 for a D850 just to get the "presumed" advantages of a crop camera, has to be outright mad!!!

The D7100 ... ALREADY a crop camera ... sells for $698, currently ... that's about a FIFTH of the price of a D850!

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

It wasn't clear at all, Hank ... he was talking about 24MP cams ... and then he mentioned the "850" ... which I assumed meant the 24MP Sony a850 ....

BebuLamar

He said the D850 has about the same pixel density as the 24MP DX camera and in fact the D850 has a little bit less pixel density than the 24MP DX camera.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

I never suggested buying a D850 for this reason. I mentioned it because it just so happens to be true that the pixel density of a Nikon D850 is similar to that of say a Nikon D500. That pixel density is crucial when it comes to cropping far away objects such as a bird in flight, and having as much detail in the final image. I agree that buying a D850 purely for this reason is probably excessive, though each to their own on that. My point is that a crop from a Nikon D850 will have more detail than a crop from a Nikon D750 (which has a much lower resolution sensor), both are full frame but the 850 has higher resolution and more pixels on the bird. My photo of say a bird is a crop from my Nikon D7200. I can't attach from my phone for some reason or I would post a photo. Say for arguments sake I had the same lens on a Nikon D850. The final crop would be of similar resolution. But cropping from a Nikon D750 would have fewer megapixels. There would be less to play with and I couldn't print as large. Chris, I hope I've illustrated my point about pixel density here. For what I do, I'm better off starting with a crop sensor rather than a full frame one, because I'm likely to want to crop.

As for whether my post was clear or not, guys, play nice and shake hands. I clearly confused someone, but not everyone. My bad. 😊

Hank Radt

Yes, it was...at least to anyone who isn't obsessed with trying to build his post count and looks for any excuse to post yet another inane comment (7000 posts? You must be really proud of yourself...then again, when you respond to yourself multiple times in your own threads, easy to build the count. Of course, you have to do that, don't you, since you ignore anyone who disagrees with you).

Good luck with whatever contest you're trying to win...

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

Please see my comment above. Chill, life is short 😊