Crop in Nikon D5 or Nikon D500 (Page 2): One thing that you don't take into consideration, however, is pixel size, which is one reason the pros go for the lower megapixel count. The...

SteveR Loc: Michigan

CO wrote:

That's correct. It's not really a misnomer in the case of the D5 and D500. The D5 and the D500 have almost exactly the same number of pixels but the D500 has those in a smaller space. You would loose over one-half of the pixels if you crop the D5 image down to the D500 size crop. You would probably end up with an image under 10 megapixels.

One thing that you don't take into consideration, however, is pixel size, which is one reason the pros go for the lower megapixel count. The individual pixels are larger and can actually gather more light. Check the specs on the camera and see if they don't list pixel size. The pixel size of the D5 may be twice as large as the D500.

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

Very good setup of yours! Thanks for the input! By the way Nikon 200-500mm is a good lens. I have Nikon 200-400mm and Nikon 800mm. But Nikon 200-500mm is easier to use hand held and the quality is good. Thanks again!

dcampbell52 wrote:

Richard, I have a full frame D610 and a DX D7100. ... (show quote)

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

I think that I got what you meant. So for the same size of the photo, D500 ends up higher megapixels (higher resolution). Thanks!

CO wrote:

That's correct. It's not really a misnomer in the case of the D5 and D500. The D5 and the D500 have almost exactly the same number of pixels but the D500 has those in a smaller space. You would loose over one-half of the pixels if you crop the D5 image down to the D500 size crop. You would probably end up with an image under 10 megapixels.

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

Oh, I did not know that there is this parameter too. Very good point! This leads me to check and learn more things. Thanks!

SteveR wrote:

One thing that you don't take into consideration, however, is pixel size, which is one reason the pros go for the lower megapixel count. The individual pixels are larger and can actually gather more light. Check the specs on the camera and see if they don't list pixel size. The pixel size of the D5 may be twice as large as the D500.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Richard HZ wrote:

Nikon D5 is FX camera but has DX mode to use. With this option, is it not necessary to have another separate DX body such as Nikon D500 for wildlife purpose? I have Nikon D4S now. I am considering to purchase Nikon D500 for longer distance shoot. I just wonder whether it is necessary because the Camera I have now or I am going to update (possibly D5) has the option of DX mode. Any opinion or suggestions? Thanks!

D5 is slightly less than 21MP FX camera. In DX mode, it's about 8.5MP.

In comparison, D500 DX is almost 21MP. So it's capturing almost 3X as much "data", in the same image area.

Your D4S has a DX mode that's similar to the D5's. Have you tried it to see if what remains is adequate for your purposes? Your 16MP camera crops to less than 7MP in DX mode.

Yes, larger pixels and less crowded sensors of FX help minimize image noise, since there's less heat and cross talk than with more crowded sensors. So, you can expect the FX camera to give better high ISO performance.

Even so, you'll still get more fine detail with the 21MP DX camera, than you will cropping a 21MP FX image down to 8.5MP.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

This is all true. Very true. But and this is a big BUT, when you shoot the bear with the fx body and then crop that image for a more enlarged print, you have thrown away 50% of the pixels where the dx camera doesn't have to throw any pixels away for that same large print. So if your fx body produces 22 megapixels, when you crop (throw) away pixels, you have fewer (12mp) pixels available where the dx still has 22 megapixels to print with.

SteveR wrote:

Richard...You need to understand crop and full fra... (show quote)

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

Richard HZ wrote:

Oh, I did not know that there is this parameter too. Very good point! This leads me to check and learn more things. Thanks!

As a rule (which is occasionally broken) I restrict use of my DX camera to shots with plenty of light, especially those where I would find it necessary to crop a full frame shot. Once light becomes an issue, I reach for the full frame.

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

Thank you very much! Very good explanation!

amfoto1 wrote:

D5 is slightly less than 21MP FX camera. In DX mod... (show quote)

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

Thanks!

jeep_daddy wrote:

This is all true. Very true. But and this is a big BUT, when you shoot the bear with the fx body and then crop that image for a more enlarged print, you have thrown away 50% of the pixels where the dx camera doesn't have to throw any pixels away for that same large print. So if your fx body produces 22 megapixels, when you crop (throw) away pixels, you have fewer (12mp) pixels available where the dx still has 22 megapixels to print with.

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

Thanks!

steve_stoneblossom wrote:

As a rule (which is occasionally broken) I restrict use of my DX camera to shots with plenty of light, especially those where I would find it necessary to crop a full frame shot. Once light becomes an issue, I reach for the full frame.

MitchTillison

The bear may be the same size on both sensors, but if one camera is a full frame 20MP sensor and the a DX crop 20MP sensor, you will get more resolution from the crop sensor.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

SteveR wrote:

Reach is a misnomer.

But thats how it is often described. Use an FX lens on a DX body and its the equivalent of a (x 1.5) lens. I get field of view. I understand that. But its nice to know that 50 is 50, 300 is 300, etc.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

kb6kgx wrote:

But thats how it is often described. Use an FX lens on a DX body and its the equivalent of a (x 1.5) lens. I get field of view. I understand that. But its nice to know that 50 is 50, 300 is 300, etc.

I use a 50mm 1.4 f/stop on my D610 and it acts as a 50mm, I use the same lens on my D7100 and it is still a 50mm f/1.4 but it has the equivalent reach (because of the crop factor of the camera) of a 75mm f/1.4 lens. This is great if you are shooting landscape and long shots as I carry both the D610 (full frame) with a wide - normal or an 18-35 zoom FX lens and I put a 70-300mm DX zoom on my D7100 (which gives me roughly a 105-450 equivalent long zoom). Or I would put the 50mm f/1.4 on the FX for normal shots or put it on the D7100 and have a roughly 75mm f/1.4 lens. I challenge you to find an affordable 75mm f/1.4 lens. Now, I could put any of these lenses on the D610 in Crop mode but why when I have a 24mp D7100 that is already cropped. And, if I wanted, I can put the D7100 in crop mode and have a 12mp (roughly) 100mm f/1.2 lens or a 140-600mm zoom but 12 mp seems to me to be giving up a lot and the camera doesn't display the crop but it is represented as a square in the regular display. But it is also why I am interested in getting the 200-500mm Nikon lens for my arsenal.

Rufus Loc: Puget Sound area, WA

Get 8 x 10 prints of that bear from the two differing cameras and on one of the prints the bear will be larger, that is, take up more of the print than the image made from the FX camera, even though the focal length of the lens that created the image was the same.