JohnBoy5562 Loc: Alabama

I’ve had my D7100 for 2 years now and I really like the photos I take with it but I’m just now starting to take portraits I’ve always shot landscapes and birds and the D7100 does a great job. But was wondering if I was to upgrade to a FX camera would I gain any benefit over the DX?

When shooting portraits with the D7100 I use a older lens the Nikon AF Micro 60mm 1:2.8 and the photos are good. Would the quality be better with a FX camera?

I’m not a professional just learning as I go. This is a example of the Nikon AF Micro 60mm 1:2.8 with the D7100. Will there be a improvement using a FX over the DX when shooting portraits?

And if so which FX would you recommend?

(Download)

Bill_de Loc: US

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/search-topic-list?q=dx+or+Fx&sectnum=0&username=

You should find a plethora of opinions by clicking above.

---

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

Bigger sensor, more detail, wide angle is easier (no crop factor), tele is usually a wash, you lose crop factor (perceived magnification), but gain a larger base image to crop from. The flip side with greater image detail (FF) in portraits is that it is not always kind to the features of the person being photographed, so you might need some soft focus filters so that aunt Bessie or uncle Fred will still let you photograph them!

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

Well John I loved my Nikon 7000 and many Nikons over the years. I have switched to Sony mirrorless
camera's and a camcorder a few years ago.I prefer a full frame camera (FX). But I started with full frame with Nikon D300 & D700 great cameras. The FF image has more real estate to put in your picture. Now I also use a cropped Sony a6300 cropped sensor and like it a lot. But my got to camera is a FF Sony a7s II. Just a background check.
As you probably know I the highly rated Nikon 850 and most important good lens will be expensive. FF lens are expensive. It depends how passionate and obsessed you are with photography. I also do video I am paid for. If you look at the advice on youtube tons of good photo guys have good opinions. What i believe is that
the full frame captures more light and I tend to allow more negative space and creative interpretation.
If I am shooting a person I may allow a wider crop and maybe position the model on one side etc.
Now plenty here will shout nothing wrong with aps-c and their isn't.
So ask yourself how far in skill and creative do you want to take your photography. And expect
a lot of expense to get a good Nikon and 3 or 4 good lens. Good luck.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

It mostly depends on your budget, lenses, the specific camera and what you shoot. They both have pluses and minuses. In my opinion most people don't take full advantage of the camera they have.

Small correction: D300 was a crop...you probably meant D3.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I love your photo of the young lady. Honestly I don't think you will notice a huge difference going to the FX camera. There are advantages of course but for the photography you do I doubt you will notice any difference. I would perhaps look into another lens rather than a different camera.

Dennis

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

IMHO.... The biggest advantage going to DX would be the more light and more detail, etc.

But...... You are happy with the 7100 which is a great camera, so why change. You get great portraits, great landscapes, that is a great camera.

You need to ask yourself what do I want to do differently or what do I want to shoot differently and is it worth the cost to expand and go to the FF. Do I really NEED the FF or do I have GAS.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

This is a very good shot. What were your settings, lens, etc. Did you use fill flash?

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

I shoot a D500 and a D850. My wife took over my D7100 and it's not going anywhere and does just fine!

TonyBot

The 7100 is an excellent camera, and unless you're planning on enlarging portraits to 20x24 or larger, you will not see a difference. I have both APSc and FF (Canon) cameras, and I prefer the FF because of the size of the viewfinder. To me, that is a distinct advantage. The disadvantage - moreso on Canon than Nikon - is that FF lenses are more expensive, whilst you can use Nikon DX lenses on Nikon FX cameras with a little penalty.
Plus (and this fact almost changed me to Nikon guy) the 7100 is a bit lighter than a FF, and the body is just smaller enough to make it easier to hold. I'd think that unless you're having a GAS attack, sticking with the 7100 is your best bet. If you want an FF camera, stick with Nikon (sshhh - don't let my daughter know I said that) and go for a nice used or refurbed D8xx model. If you're going to step up, go the best you can afford.

JohnBoy5562 Loc: Alabama

f/2.8
0.001250 - ( 1/800 seconds )
60 mm
90 mm (35 mm format)
ISO 400
Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
May 19,2019 12:26:13 PM
0.00 Miles per hour
0.000000 feet above sea level (+/- 0.00)
0.00 EV
Manual exposure
Manual
Auto white balance
Pattern Metering mode
John Welborn Jr.
© 2019
NIKON CORPORATION
NIKON D7100
Ver.1.04
30443
AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8
2721446
33.536672° -86.559497°

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

JohnBoy5562 Loc: Alabama

Which lens would you recommend for portraits?
The one I use is Nikon AF Micro 60mm 1:2.8. I have a Nikon AF Nikkor 28-80mm 1:3.3 - 5.6 G lens which is surprisingly good to be so cheap.

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

If you don't use the crop tool much, the greater magnification required to get an image produced by a small sensor will be higher than with a larger sensor. This results in larger sensor images looking "cleaner" and more highly detailed.

For the most part, crop sensor cameras have mostly slower zoom lenses native to the format. With larger sensor cameras, you can get any number of F1.4 - F2.8 lenses. The full frame lenses are generally better build and image quality, bigger and more expensive.

If you stay at low ISOs and use good lenses, regardless of whether they are intended for DX or FX+DX, there is no reason why you would "need" to go to FX for portraiture. For landscape, animals etc - I prefer a high MP FX camera - D800 or higher - over a DX camera. For me it's a tie when a D500 is being considered.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Thanks Dave. I have to admit I had no idea about digital cameras and bought a Nikon D70 as my first digital. At the time I was used to film cameras and had no idea about DX and FX choices. I thought they were all the same. I used my D70 in blissful ignorance until a professional photographer friend suggested the D800. He had purchased the D800E but I didn't have the extra money for the E model. I still have the D800 and love it. I don't know if I would ever replace it as long as it works. For, I am guessing here, about 95% of all photographers, the DX cameras will fill about every need known. The differences between DX and full frame will not be missed by those people.

Dennis