rbmartiniv wrote:
I've been using a Nikon D7000 (Dx format) for about 8 years and have accumulated several expensive lenses. I'm ready for a new camera and am interested in possibly one in the Fx format. I understand I can still use my Dx lenses but the Fx camera will automatically crop the frame to the Dx format. If I never buy any more lenses then it would be a stupid move, buying an Fx format camera and using it in a Dx format. At this time I don't know what other lenses, if any, I will want to buy (I'm 74 years young). If I buy more lenses I would buy Fx format of course. I would appreciate some advice, especially from anyone who has made a similar jump (from Dx to Fx). Thank you in advance.
I've been using a Nikon D7000 (Dx format) for abou... (
show quote)
The first question you should be asking is WHY you think you need an FX camera? WHAT do you think FX will do for you and your photography?
The fact is, most people don't really need FX. A modern DX camera can handle all their needs very well. Unless you print big... really big (16x24" or bigger)... you won't see much benefit from FX. People talks about all the "goodness" of FX images... but they are the only ones who ever actually see it, while viewing their original images on their computer screens at higher magnifications (50% or larger).... Far, far larger than they'll ever actually print their images. By the time the images are re-sized to make a 13x19" print or for online display, much of that "FX goodness" is gone.
But, yes, Nikon FX cameras can be used with DX lenses... no adapter needed. In fact, the camera will shift itself into a cropped "DX mode". But there's a big drop in image resolution when this happens.
You also didn't specify what FX camera you're considering. Some are more practical than others to use in DX mode. For example, a 46MP D850 will produce 19.4MP images in DX mode. But that's a $3000+ camera. A more affordable option such as a used 36MP D810 (~$1800) will produce more modest 15.4MP DX images. Or a 24MP D750 ($1400) will end up around 10.7MP.
Especially with the last, coming from a 16MP D7000 you'd actually be seeing more of a downgrade than an upgrade. And the D810 would be a "break even" for you. So neither D750 or D810 would do much for you unless you also convert to FX lenses. And those are bigger, heavier and generally more expensive than DX lenses.
There also can be some "hidden costs" to "going FX". For example, the 46MP files of the D850 will fill up memory cards and hard drives a lot faster. And, depending upon what you have now, to work with those big files might call for more computer power. A newer camera might require a software upgrade. Some years ago I upgraded my APS-C cameras... the new model wasn't compatible with my version of Photoshop, so I had to upgrade that too... but the new version of Photoshop wasn't compatible with my computer operating system, so I had to upgrade that too... but my computer itself wasn't up to handling the new operating system or newer version of Photoshop, so I ended up buying a whole new computer and having to update some other non-photo-related software too. In the end, that was a VERY expensive "camera upgrade"!
Depending upon what you're hoping to accomplish, a 24MP D7200 DX camera might be a more sensible upgrade (currently on sale for about $800), allowing you to continue using your DX lenses to their fullest and keeping your kit a more practical size and weight. D500 and D7500 are both newer but slightly lower resolution 21MP cameras, plus they are both more expensive than D7200... But if you decide to go the DX route, compare the features of the three to see which fits your needs best.
Personally I use both full frame and APS-C cameras. The latter I use about 10X more than the full frame. Probably even more-so now since I'm using newer APS-C that have higher ISO capability, image quality and resolution improvements that rival what full frame from just a few years ago offered. I will eventually need to upgrade my full frame camera, but haven't needed to rush out and do so because it sees so much less use than my APS-C cameras.... and because newer APS-C cameras have seen such significant improvements.