FX versus DX (Page 4): Thank you. Very much! Now I just have to justify another Nikon, which I always can, love those new Toys (Nikons)...

ValliPride Loc: Lost in Florida

Thank you. Very much! Now I just have to justify another Nikon, which I always can, love those new Toys (Nikons)

rdgreenwood Loc: Kennett Square, Pennsylvania

DigitalDon wrote:

I agree with Mark7892. The detail with the D800E is incredible. The 36MP versus 24MP is HUGE. The no anti aliasing filter is also HUGE! Yes, you do need bigger cards, better glass and plenty of storage on your computer.

Hear! Hear! I totally agree. I am constantly astounded at the resolution I get from my D800E. I'd like faster fps, but I wouldn't trade my resolution for any frame rate. "Shoot wide/crop tight" has become my mantra, and the results have been spectacular.

Kate1948

Both have advantages.

Generally, DX will be sharper, more detailed out of the camera, but noisier. When you remove the noise, the image gets softer.

FX handles noise in the shadows and midpoints a lot better allowing you to shoot successfully under more conditions.

If you can afford FX, that would be my choice--especially if you already have lenses that are compatible with the camera you choose.

Note, however, that the D600 and D800 families (which I would love to have) are very high mega pixel cameras. You have to be sure that your computer has the processing power and the storage for these large files. When you go above 12-16 MP (which is really the optimal range for most users, although I've found 10MP sufficient) storage becomes a problem.

If you decide to go with the D610 (which I'm dying to do), check the return policy of the dealer you buy from. Although less than with the D600, the D610 still has oil spot problems on the sensor and some people need to return them for replacement. It seems to be a manufacturing flaw having to do with the shutter release mechanism.

gessman Loc: Colorado

GoofyNewfie wrote:

There are FX lenses with internal motors and they will work perfectly fine with DX cameras.

Got it a$$backards did I? LOL! :shock: I may be more dyslexic than I thought. ...and as many times as I have urged people to not talk about something when they weren't absolutely sure. Got me some rosy cheeks over here. :oops: I don't know if it's been all that noticeable but I rarely ever get involved in a Nikon discussion, not since the days of digital when I switched over to Canon, again, and now the "why" is clear. I simply haven't kept up but you can bet I won't forget that. :XD: :thumbup: S'cuse me folks! Now moving right along to the next thread here! 8-) :-D

ValliPride Loc: Lost in Florida

Wow thanks for your info.

shutterbob Loc: Tucson

Mark7829 wrote:

Your max fps is 6 with a D610. You can get 6 fps in DX mode on the D800E. Since the files sizes are bigger on the D800E, the output is likely the same or better on the D800E in CM. You are also getting 1/8000 of sec on the D800E and 1/4000 of sec on 610 among other major and significant differences. Your getting better detail out of the D800E. Any differences between the 610 and D800E is negated by the way the D800E handles landscape.

:thumbdown: Unless you are shooting supersonic jets at speed from 100 feet away on the ground, there is not a lot of need for 1/8,000 shutter speed. I would get the D610, which is a remarkable camera, and put the money I saved by not buying the D800 into quality glass.

JimGuy

oldschool wrote:

New reader, first posting. I am now convinced digital is here to stay and am prepared to semi-retire my Nikon F4S. I have a number of lenses, mostly shoot outdoors with my 2.8 70-210. Landscape, wildlife, and sports are all in the mix. I was prepared to go with a D7100 but am becoming concerned about dropping from FX to DX. A D610 or even D800 is not out of range price wise. Any thoughts/recommendations are appreciated.

FX -D800/D800E probably has best sensor re dynamic range, resolution. High quality lens's recommended to take full advantage of resolution. D800E with no high pass filter may produce more aberrations than D800, but may produce slightly sharper images under ideal conditions. Differences generally not noticeable.
D4 is fast, expensive, and may be best for low light, action, sports.

DX - crop sensor simulates longer focal length, can be handy for wildlife, anything that requires long lens.
Can often get by with less expensive lens's since dx uses the center area of lens where most are sharpest instead of whole thing, eliminating soft edges, corners of budget lens's in many cases.
D7100 will do 6 fps but small buffer fills up quickly.
D300s with a pro style body will do 7 fps at jpg or 12 bit raw, has a larger buffer, but is an older camera with just 12mp.

JimGuy

Kate1948 wrote:

Both have advantages. br br Generally, DX will b... (show quote)

DX does not generally produce sharper images. Dont know where you got that idea.
Re storate...large hard drives are fairly cheap now days.

Pentony Loc: Earth Traveller

Danilo wrote:

This may or may not be important to you, oldschool... (show quote)

Interesting. Now only if Nikon would make an FX with an articulating LCD :lol:

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

JimGuy wrote:

DX does not generally produce sharper images. Dont know where you got that idea.
Re storate...large hard drives are fairly cheap now days.

Agree - DX does not produce sharper images. Memory is cheap. An adequate desktop will handle large files and a lot depends on what you do with each image and the amount of processing with add ons will increase file size and throughput..

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Pentony wrote:

Interesting. Now only if Nikon would make an FX with an articulating LCD :lol:

The main gripe I have with new mirrorless is the electronic view finder. I prefer the un-pixelated view of the traditional DSLR

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

shutterbob wrote:

:thumbdown: Unless you are shooting supersonic jets at speed from 100 feet away on the ground, there is not a lot of need for 1/8,000 shutter speed. I would get the D610, which is a remarkable camera, and put the money I saved by not buying the D800 into quality glass.

There is one good reason apart from stopping action to have 1/8000 of a second, and that is for using wide apertures to limit DOF in bright situations. I use it quite often for that.

Another thing to consider is that the D610 can only do three images with auto exposure bracketing, as compared to nine for the D800. Even though they are two steps apart that is a serious handicap if you ever plan to do HDR, as is the lack of 1/8000 in this context.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

They do AF and work quite well.

gessman wrote:

I hear they won't autofocus 'cause there's no motor in those bodies??? Canon did it to us with a mount change, Nikon with the AF motor.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

oldschool wrote:

New reader, first posting. I am now convinced digital is here to stay and am prepared to semi-retire my Nikon F4S. I have a number of lenses, mostly shoot outdoors with my 2.8 70-210. Landscape, wildlife, and sports are all in the mix. I was prepared to go with a D7100 but am becoming concerned about dropping from FX to DX. A D610 or even D800 is not out of range price wise. Any thoughts/recommendations are appreciated.

lookfor a good used nikon f6 body - it will change your thoughts on digital. the last thing you want is a dx - it's the same thing as using an aps film camera. great for postcard photos and not much else. the fx will provide you with the approximation of the 35mm frame to which you've become used.
good luck!

amehta Loc: Boston

wj cody wrote:

lookfor a good used nikon f6 body - it will change your thoughts on digital. the last thing you want is a dx - it's the same thing as using an aps film camera. great for postcard photos and not much else. the fx will provide you with the approximation of the 35mm frame to which you've become used.
good luck!

:thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

The Nikon D2 series are DX cameras. All the guys using them only made postcards photos?