dylee8 wrote:
I have a Nikon D750 and D7000, and a sigma 150-600 lens that I use for wild life photography.
For a long time my understanding was that for the same lens, a cropped sensor camera has a longer reach compared to full frame. There is an "equivalent focal length", in this case 225-900mm. Taking wild life pictures with the DX camera is preferred because of this.
But then I read that lens focal lengths don't change. The term equivalent focal length is misleading. It really is angle of view. Because full frame camera has a bigger sensor (in this case 1.5X). It captures more picture compared to cropped frame, and gives the illusion of less reach.
Also the D750 is 24 megapixels, compared to 16 on the D7000. Even considering the sensor size differences, the "Megapixel Density" are identical. This means that if I start cropping the pictures from both cameras, I should get the exact same resolution - even though I am cropping more on the D750.
Therefore I should not be using the D7000 at all - wild life or otherwise. For lens reach/picture resolution there is no difference, and D750 offers so much more.
Is this a valid? I like to get opinions from fellow UHHs.
I have a Nikon D750 and D7000, and a sigma 150-600... (
show quote)
I would hesitate to say never use the 7000. There may be certain situations in which the 7000 provides better images, e.g. when the extra reach of the crop sensor comes into play. However, some of the advantages of the crop sensor reach might be offset by the processor improvements between the 7000 and 750.
instances. Pretty simple to run your own tests.