No, I don't think that's right because if I put my 35mm DX f/1.8G lens on my D7000 I thought it still provides me a 52.5mm FF equivalent FOV. I believe it's just that being for DX by design, the circle of light coming through the DX lens is reduced to fit the crop sensor in full rather than being cropped, therefore the lens is made smaller and lighter, or am I wrong and the DX designed lenses are providing the full MM result? [I don't have a FF body to compare this].

OP here: with all that said, I must ask, in spite of the "sweet spot" benefit of the crop sensor mentioned, wouldn't an image of a distant subject enlarged using true magnification power create a better image than the illusion of the same image created by just a crop sensor's reach ? If so, is it because the resolution would be better and/or less noise would result by true magnification than the blow up effect of the reach?

I should state that one of the reasons I posed the original "reach vs. magnification" question is that my FF Envy Syndrome has returned because I bought a couple of used primes for my D7000, (20mm f/2.8 and 85mm f/1.8D), and I'm not fully satisfied with the image results.

The 20mm manifests as a 30mm FOV (as I knew it would) and is not wide enough for me and the 85m is like 127mm, and so, while the bokeh and blur is great, the composition is often too tight.

Therefore, I have started watching ebay to see how fast the price drops on D700's as hopefully more and more owners sell them to flock to the D800 and create a supply/demand imbalance so that I can afford one.

Jeffrey

Can anyone please explain in simple terms the difference between the DX "reach" (compared to FX) versus image magnification?

I'm guessing the increased reach of the DX crop sensor on any given focal length lens is not really the same as increasing magnification, or is it in regards to the end result of an image?

Thanks in advance,

Jeffrey

I was just coming to post a question about DX "reach" versus magnification, and that helped answer some other questions as I ponder going FX with a used D700
thank you

Anything wide better for the price under $500 (used) than Nikon 20mm f/2.8D on a D7000?

I already have the 35mm f/1.8G, 85mm f/1.8D and I'm looking for a wider lens to round out my prime kit bag.



Thank you in advance so I don't litter the thread with "thanks" over and over....


Jeffrey

thanks, Russ, and your web site images are great!

That's a good example of what I was looking for, too, thanks

You hit the nail on the head, Russ, that's the hazy effect I was asking about, great sample image of it, too. I never meant blurry or out of focus as others inferred (some in jest).

Is that reduction of range of colors something I'd have in LR3 or PS CS5? If so, I have Scott kelby's great books on both, any idea what it's called there? (CS5 has a huge amount of content)

J.

here's one example I found quickly, but not the extreme effect I originally saw and asked about, can't locate that right now (yet).
thx
[I think the next answer to use PP may be what I needed to hear]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/57514591@N02/8133354610/in/faves-finch585/

How do I get the hazy / soft focus effect I see others purposely use in portraiture? Seems to be more than the lighting. Is there a filter for this or is it just lighting and/or a technique?

I'm shooting with D7000, 85mm f/1.8D.


Thank you in advance for sharing.

Jeffrey

PROFPB: Since you have them all, please tell us which TWO are your favs and why, if you could only bring two, you know, in the boat along with the hen, the grain and the fox?

Well, half correct, in the title I asked "pick only two Nikon primes for DX...."
;-)

no, no, no boys... the OP (me ;-) said "Nikon"

(meesa can't afford Zeiss or Leica ;-)

Ok, sorry, I was trying to take a poll of what two primes everyone else already likes on DX, especially wide, regardless of my criteria :-) if they could only have two (you know stuck on a desert island...)
but I shoot everything but wildlife and sports, so don't feel i need a super-tele, and I currently have:

35mm f/1.8G
85mm f/1.8D (love the aperture ring)
17-55mm f/2.8G

I shelved the kit 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 G and wondering how wide others would commit to as a practical prime.

17-55mm f/2.8G, love it, but enjoying the primes.
Wondering how wide to go if I get another prime (for D7000) and what you all like.

J.