FX BODY (Page 2): Hi Mondolinni, I recently faced a similar problem that you are facing when I upgraded from a D7000 to a D750. I didn't have the budget for the FX lens I wanted so I...

Al Beatty Loc: Boise, Idaho

Hi Mondolinni,

I recently faced a similar problem that you are facing when I upgraded from a D7000 to a D750. I didn't have the budget for the FX lens I wanted so I went with a temporary Plan B - a used 28-80 f3.3 no VR. It cost me less than $75.00 on eBay. Is it the best? No, but it produces much better pictures than any of my DX lenses do on the FX camera and the price is reasonable. I'll upgrade soon to my "want lens" the 24-70 but for now I'm doing fine with the used one. Take care & ...

Bud S Loc: Logan Ohio

ronichas wrote:

if you can't afford both, go for the full frame glass in the future. it works great with both cropped & full frame sensors. then when you can afford the full frame camera, you already have the lenses.

I have been getting some FF Nikon glass in anticipation of getting the D750. My reasoning for changing is the low light capabilities as I shoot a lot of low light portraiture and noise is an issue with the 7100. If all I shot was landscapes it wouldn't be an issue with me.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Mondolinni wrote:

I'm sure this has been discussed many times before, but I can't find it right now. If I upgrade to an FX Body, can I benefit from it with DX glass, or would I have to upgrade the glass as well???

Well, the lenses will most likely fit, but you probably won't like the cropped results. So yes, you can use them, but you won't gain many optical advantages by doing so.

I've said this to many photographers... "FX lenses work best on FX bodies, but they will also work okay on DX bodies. But DX lenses won't cover the full sensor area of FX bodies. Your images will have limited pixel density. Therefore, avoid mixing formats. When you do mix, try to avoid DX lenses."

Substitute the terms "Full Frame" and "APS-C" for FX and DX when using Canons.

A primary reason for using a Full Frame/FX camera is to have LOTS of pixels to make BIG enlargements, or to have room for cropping in post-production. Another is to have shallower depth of field by using a longer lens for the same field of coverage. Sticking with DX lenses negates these advantages.

It's like driving a car that runs premium gas If you can't afford the lenses, how can you afford the camera?

Mondolinni Loc: Long Island, New York

And, There It Is!

burkphoto wrote:

Well, the lenses will most likely fit, but you pro... (show quote)

:(

ggttc Loc: TN

burkphoto wrote:

A primary reason for using a Full Frame/FX camera is to have LOTS of pixels to make BIG enlargements, or to have room for cropping in post-production. Another is to have shallower depth of field by using a longer lens for the same field of coverage. Sticking with DX lenses negates these advantages.

The advantages are tremendous with a FX and suitable frame lenses...

The ability to crop alone in PP is makes it worth the extra bucks...

My wife shoots a D810 and I shoot a 7100...and the differences are notable...

Look for refurbished lenses....

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

BebuLamar wrote:

Almost all FX bodies give poorer result with DX glass than a DX body. So if you don't get FX glass you will get poorer result than what you can get with an DX body with the same glass.

Why?

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

BebuLamar wrote:

Almost all FX bodies give poorer result with DX glass than a DX body. So if you don't get FX glass you will get poorer result than what you can get with an DX body with the same glass.

What?

twowindsbear

Bud S wrote:

I have been getting some FF Nikon glass in anticipation of getting the D750. My reasoning for changing is the low light capabilities as I shoot a lot of low light portraiture and noise is an issue with the 7100. If all I shot was landscapes it wouldn't be an issue with me.

WHY are you shooting portraits in LOW LIGHT???? Other than wanting 'noisey' pix.

Bud S Loc: Logan Ohio

twowindsbear wrote:

WHY are you shooting portraits in LOW LIGHT???? Other than wanting 'noisey' pix.

we shoot at our local cave and scenic areas that don't have much in the way of good natural lighting, not my choice but that's what it is. Some indoor venues also have poor lighting and while I use a speedlight I often need to crank the iso up some. Can't always use wide open aperture for group shots, can't afford that shallow depth of field. Any suggestions, am I missing something?

twowindsbear

Bud S wrote:

we shoot at our local cave and scenic areas that don't have much in the way of good natural lighting, not my choice but that's what it is. Some indoor venues also have poor lighting and while I use a speedlight I often need to crank the iso up some. Can't always use wide open aperture for group shots, can't afford that shallow depth of field. Any suggestions, am I missing something?

Use multiple, battery powered flash units, slaved to each other & your camera. Or, 'lug' along a full-fledged studio lighting system. There is a learning curve for multiple lights for portraits, but you CAN do it!

Good luck

Bud S Loc: Logan Ohio

twowindsbear wrote:

Use multiple, battery powered flash units, slaved to each other & your camera. Or, 'lug' along a full-fledged studio lighting system. There is a learning curve for multiple lights for portraits, but you CAN do it!

Good luck

:thumbup:

sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

Asuming you are shooting Nikon, remember that fx lenses are for sensors the aprox size of 35mm film. So all those af lenses made for film are basically inexpensive fx like lenses. until you can afford newer lenses. look at KEH.com best prices for used. free 6 month warranty on what they sell