catalint Loc: oslo

Pretty much the fact that I was looking into financing the camera through a down-payment method.
An 800e would have been niced, but I could only get second hand, and for that I would have to pay the seller in full straight away. I almost went for the D810, with down-payment , but I came to my senses, and went with the D750.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Do you want large and heavy but gets great quality and good wide angles, or smaller and lighter that gets great quality with good tele reach. If you are a tele on a tripod guy, the FX is yours. If you are a sports and action guy, you want the 500.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Nonsense! A single anecdote is not evidence. There are many wedding pros out there using Fuji mirrorless as their principal camera.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

why not?

pego99

fx

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Really? I don't attend a lot of weddings (too depressing) but I haven't seen anyone shooting a wedding with a 4X5 for 40 years.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

...I started DX and eventually went FX. You can do dang near anything you want using crop-frame equipment, but there certainly are circumstances better covered by full-frame...and my FF bodies will shoot in both if need be. I don't know 'bout the later models (750, 600/10, etc) but you can pick up a used D800/810 fairly inexpensively, heck, I sold my D700 and wish I had it back! The upshot is, get FX because it'll do everything a DX body will do and normally have much better low light performance in the bargain, while the DX is simply limited by the size of the sensor. I think having a tool that will perform across a complete gamut of jobs is what you're after...

Silverman Loc: Michigan

Just curious, what did you find lacking in your Nikon D3300? That is what I own presently, with 3 DX lens.
As you mentioned, you are a newbie, as am I, so experience is what I am personally striving to achieve, before I upgrade to more expensive DSLR system, I have much learning to do, and also realize a more complicated Camera will make my learning experience more difficult, so I will wait until I am a more seasoned DSLR Photographer, before I attempt to upgrade my equipment. This will require patience on my part, but I know it will be beneficial in my Photography future. I do wish you the best in all of your future photography decisions.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Correction: The Canon 7D is an APS-C (or DX to you Nikon folk)

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

F--- FF.

sholland98 Loc: Benbrook, Texas

I have both the D500 and the D750 and usually carry, use, and love both. A simple answer to your question is DX for subjects, FX for landscape. You already have The DX so buy an FX to supplement. The 750 is a great camera don't underestimate it comparing it to the 500. Go with what your budget will allow 610, 750, 810 or D5. They will all deliver.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

It entirely depends upon your subject matter and your client's requirements.

Personally I use both full frame and crop sensor cameras.

Full frame is ideal for some things: portraits, landscape, a lot of macro work, low light/high ISO shooting and various things that call for wide angle lenses.

But crop can be "better" for other things: sports/action, travel, some macro work and various things that require telephoto lenses.

Most people will find crop sensor cameras more versatile and full frame cameras significantly more expensive to use. With full frame, in order to "get your money's worth", you will largely be limited to full frame-capable lenses that tend to be bigger, heavier and more expensive.

Now, many Nikon FX cameras can be used in DX mode, to make them "act like" a crop sensor camera and even allow DX lenses to be used upon it... This is a neat feature, however you give up a lot of resolution when you do that. It's actually no different from jheavily cropping an FX image. A 36MP FX cameras "becomes" only 15MP when you switch it to DX mode. A 24MP FX camera is reduced to under 10MP when switched to DX mode. In contrast, most current DX models are 20MP to 24MP.

So if you will be specialized in one type of photography or another, either FX or DX might be better for you. But a lot of pros use both. We used multiple formats in the past with film, too. It's easier now with digital, though, because FX and DX can share a lot of lenses and accessories. Back in the good/bad old days of film, we had to buy relatively complete systems in each format... 35mm, medium format, and large format each had their own set of lenses and accessories.

It's actually pretty rare for clients to make any distinction between FX and DX. They usually just want image that meet their needs well at a fair price and could care less what gear you use to get those shots.

Since you are considering "going pro"... a couple things to think about:

- There are approximately 1.5 bazillion people "going pro" each month. Their friends and family tell them the photos they're taking with that entry-level DSLR and kit lens are fantastic and pro-quality.

- Don't quit your day job! About 2 or 3 out of every 100 of those new pros will ever actually make a profit at it. The other 97 or 98 will be out of business in a year or two.

- Most of those "wannabes" would be better served taking business courses, than buying photo gear or taking photography classes. "Professional photography" is about 90% business, 10% photography.

- Amateur photographers photograph what they want, how they want, whenever they want. Professional photographers shoot what the client wants, how the client wants it shot, and have to do so on the client's timetable.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I'm not saying you can't do a wedding. You do know what I'm talking about when I say portrait size, though, don't you? I wouldn't try that with a Fuji mirrorless.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

What size is that?

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Unless you are making poster sized portraits, a Fuji would make beautiful portraits. Even at poster size - the finished print would be on a wall over a mantel and would still be perfectly acceptable. Portraits do not require high contrast or extreme sharpness - especially wedding portraits. In fact softening filters have often been used for portrait work. I was a photographer's model - did a lot of covers in my younger days - and learned a lot about studio photography. No woman wants to see all her pores and wrinkles in a photo! And most weddings involve at least one woman!