Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Lens use, from DX to FX
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Oct 8, 2018 00:31:16   #
bsmith52
 
I am considering moving up to FX, D750, after many years shooting Nikon DX cameras, currently the D7100. I have two primes, 35mm and 50mm.

My question is concerning my 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR Nikon lens. I have really enjoyed this lens on my D7100.

I understand crop factor, but is there any enhancement(s) the D750 would give me over the D7100 using this lens?

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 01:20:27   #
amfoto1 (a regular here)
 
Which 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR do you have? There are three currently available: AF-P DX 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR (crop only), AF-P 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR (FX), and AF-S 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR (FX).

If yours is the DX, then it will crop on the D750... you'll end up with about 10MP files instead of 24MP.

If it's one of the FX lenses, it simply won't have as much "reach" as it gave you on your D7100. If you use the 300mm end of the lens a lot, you'll need to look into a 400 or 500mm lens for the D750.

On D750, your 35mm will no longer be a "normal" lens... Instead it will be a very moderate wide angle. And on the FX camera the 50mm will be a "normal" lens, instead of the short telephoto it is now on your D7100.

AFAIK, all Nikon 50mm are FX lenses... so will work fine on a D750.

Some Nikon 35mm are DX lenses... if yours is one of those, it will crop on the D750 too. Other 35mm primes are FX and will work without cropping.

What is it you hope to achieve "moving up" to an FX camera? Your D7100 and the D750 have the same 24MP resolution. If you don't make big enlargements from your photos, you won't see much difference. Well, actually you will when you are looking at your images ridiculously enlarged at "100%" on your computer... but after you've sized it to make an 8x10, 11x14 or to display online, no one else will ever see the difference.

One difference would be that the FX camera will show less noise at high ISOs... which can be helpful in low light conditions.

Of course, with an FX camera you'll have somewhat fewer lenses to choose from, although there still are plenty in the Nikon system. FX lenses will tend to be bigger and more expensive than DX lenses, too.

And the D750 has a 1/4000 top shutter speed and a 1/200 flash sync (vs 1/8000 and 1/250 on your D7100).

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 02:01:22   #
TonyP
 
bsmith52 wrote:
I am considering moving up to FX, D750, after many years shooting Nikon DX cameras, currently the D7100. I have two primes, 35mm and 50mm.

My question is concerning my 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR Nikon lens. I have really enjoyed this lens on my D7100.

I understand crop factor, but is there any enhancement(s) the D750 would give me over the D7100 using this lens?


I was in pretty much the same situation as you a little while ago.
D7100 with the 70-300 (DX version), but I also have the Nikkor 24-70 2.8 (non VR version).
Im happy with the combo I have, but a rush of GAS (sort of), had me considering the D750 for the extra features.
However the results of a test run with a borrowed D750 and my 70-300 just didnt look as good as I get with the D7100.
The 24-70 was okay but as I only post to my website and occasionally enlarge to 8x10 max the results really didnt justify the expense
of the D750 and a FX version of the 70-300.
So I settled down, returned the D750 and continued with the D7100. It really is a great camera.
Just my 2 cents worth.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 07:20:39   #
bsmith52
 
amfoto1 wrote:
Which 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR do you have? There are three currently available: AF-P DX 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR (crop only), AF-P 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR (FX), and AF-S 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR (FX).

If yours is the DX, then it will crop on the D750... you'll end up with about 10MP files instead of 24MP.

If it's one of the FX lenses, it simply won't have as much "reach" as it gave you on your D7100. If you use the 300mm end of the lens a lot, you'll need to look into a 400 or 500mm lens for the D750.

On D750, your 35mm will no longer be a "normal" lens... Instead it will be a very moderate wide angle. And on the FX camera the 50mm will be a "normal" lens, instead of the short telephoto it is now on your D7100.

AFAIK, all Nikon 50mm are FX lenses... so will work fine on a D750.

Some Nikon 35mm are DX lenses... if yours is one of those, it will crop on the D750 too. Other 35mm primes are FX and will work without cropping.

What is it you hope to achieve "moving up" to an FX camera? Your D7100 and the D750 have the same 24MP resolution. If you don't make big enlargements from your photos, you won't see much difference. Well, actually you will when you are looking at your images ridiculously enlarged at "100%" on your computer... but after you've sized it to make an 8x10, 11x14 or to display online, no one else will ever see the difference.

One difference would be that the FX camera will show less noise at high ISOs... which can be helpful in low light conditions.

Of course, with an FX camera you'll have somewhat fewer lenses to choose from, although there still are plenty in the Nikon system. FX lenses will tend to be bigger and more expensive than DX lenses, too.

And the D750 has a 1/4000 top shutter speed and a 1/200 flash sync (vs 1/8000 and 1/250 on your D7100).
Which 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 VR do you have? There are t... (show quote)


All lenses I mentioned are Fx

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 08:12:49   #
Fotomacher
 
amfoto1 wrote:

Of course, with an FX camera you'll have somewhat fewer lenses to choose from, although there still are plenty in the Nikon system.


I am just going to address this comment - the Nikon F mount is mostly unchanged since 1959. The D750 has an in-body focus motor and an aperture feeler. SO - the D750 is compatible with all of the Nikkor AI, AI-s, Series E, AF-D, AF-S and AF-P lenses which currently number about 390. I don’t think “somewhat fewer” is accurate.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 09:46:23   #
larryepage (a regular here)
 
I converted to digital photography in 2006, with a DX Fuji Pro S4. It took beautiful 6mp images with a dual set of sensors, providing much wider dynamic range than was otherwise available at the time. But everythin about it was slow (startup, shutter release, post exposure processin and storage), and the user interface, to me, was pretty awkward. So I very quickly bought a Nikon D200, which was advertised as "better, faster, and stronger," keeping the Fuji for those few occasions, like Christmas, when I took photos including people. It was, I think, Nikon's last model with a CCD sensor, and there are times that I still dig it out, because it can have some really nice effects. Later I got a D300 & D300s, but stayed with DX bodies even though I long ago made the decision to buy only FX lenses (in case I later decided to switch formats).

Last summer, though, I made the conscious decision to broaden my photographic horizons. Specifically, I decided to explore some new areas requiring improved low light performance and much greater wide angle capability. The low light requirement pushed me toward something newer than what I had, and the need for more wide angle capabiity pushed me to full frame. Because I had concerns about the new D850, I found a D810 at a local camera store and traded some other equipment for it. Along with a new 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, I was now in the full frame business. I am very happy with my decision (and yes, I still have my DX bodies for the times that I have needs for more basic equipment or want to photograph in a high-risk environment.)

My counsel would be to carefully think about what you would like to accomplish with your switch. The big, non-debatable functionality that you will gain is more wide angle capability. From the lenses that you have, it's hard for me to guess whether that would be a big deal for you or not. With today's sensors, you can easily crop images at the telephoto end, if necessary. Larger sensor elements for the same resolution do make bigger targets for photons in extreme low-light situations and will usually give better results at similar ISO settings. I also believe that there may be some intangible benefits with shooting in full frame, but those are impossible to prove and very 'squishy' to try to talk about.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2018 08:46:44   #
| Reply
Oct 9, 2018 10:08:10   #
Leon S
 
I think you were thinking of the Fuji S3. I believe Fuji went from the S3 to the S5 and didn't have a S5 body.

larryepage wrote:
I converted to digital photography in 2006, with a DX Fuji Pro S4. It took beautiful 6mp images with a dual set of sensors, providing much wider dynamic range than was otherwise available at the time. But everythin about it was slow (startup, shutter release, post exposure processin and storage), and the user interface, to me, was pretty awkward. So I very quickly bought a Nikon D200, which was advertised as "better, faster, and stronger," keeping the Fuji for those few occasions, like Christmas, when I took photos including people. It was, I think, Nikon's last model with a CCD sensor, and there are times that I still dig it out, because it can have some really nice effects. Later I got a D300 & D300s, but stayed with DX bodies even though I long ago made the decision to buy only FX lenses (in case I later decided to switch formats).

Last summer, though, I made the conscious decision to broaden my photographic horizons. Specifically, I decided to explore some new areas requiring improved low light performance and much greater wide angle capability. The low light requirement pushed me toward something newer than what I had, and the need for more wide angle capabiity pushed me to full frame. Because I had concerns about the new D850, I found a D810 at a local camera store and traded some other equipment for it. Along with a new 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, I was now in the full frame business. I am very happy with my decision (and yes, I still have my DX bodies for the times that I have needs for more basic equipment or want to photograph in a high-risk environment.)

My counsel would be to carefully think about what you would like to accomplish with your switch. The big, non-debatable functionality that you will gain is more wide angle capability. From the lenses that you have, it's hard for me to guess whether that would be a big deal for you or not. With today's sensors, you can easily crop images at the telephoto end, if necessary. Larger sensor elements for the same resolution do make bigger targets for photons in extreme low-light situations and will usually give better results at similar ISO settings. I also believe that there may be some intangible benefits with shooting in full frame, but those are impossible to prove and very 'squishy' to try to talk about.
I converted to digital photography in 2006, with a... (show quote)

| Reply
Oct 9, 2018 10:13:20   #
Dug E Pi
 
My daughter and I shoot together and she has a D7000 and I a D3400. I inherited some money and bought us each a D750. We shoot many indoor and low light events and are both very happy with the upgrade. A lot fewer missed focus in the darker environments and cleaner images. She mostly uses a Nikkor 18-200 and I used a 50mm 1.8 (before I bought 'Baby' Sigma 105mm F1.4) If you shoot mainly outdoors in good light you won't see much difference. In dim indoor shots where flash may not be allowed it is a night and day difference and you can't take our D750's from us.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2018 12:06:22   #
larryepage (a regular here)
 
I think you are correct about the model number number. Don't know whether to claim a memory error or a typing error on my part. I do not have that camera any more, so can't pull it out and look for sure. It was the model before the one that used the Nikon D200 body.

Thanks for the correction.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2018 13:53:48   #
WayneL
 
larryepage wrote:
I think you are correct about the model number number. Don't know whether to claim a memory error or a typing error on my part. I do not have that camera any more, so can't pull it out and look for sure. It was the model before the one that used the Nikon D200 body.

Thanks for the correction.


That would be the S3 or maybe the older S2

| Reply
Oct 9, 2018 15:13:29   #
ELNikkor
 
My D5100 was a great camera for many years, but since I bought the D750 in May, I've hardly gone back to it; it seems more like a toy now.

| Reply
Oct 10, 2018 09:10:22   #
Leon S
 
larryepage wrote:
I think you are correct about the model number number. Don't know whether to claim a memory error or a typing error on my part. I do not have that camera any more, so can't pull it out and look for sure. It was the model before the one that used the Nikon D200 body.

Thanks for the correction.


The reason I remember this trivia is because for a while I shot the S2. My pick up was broken into and the camera and lenses were stolen. My house insurance gave me enough money to replace it or they would buy me the new model the S5. At the time the S3 was not available new and Fuji did not have an have a S4 in production. I chose to pay a little more and get the Nikon D700. Turned out to be a great decision to get the D700, which I still have and use.

| Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.