I used to go to Guan years ago (1980s) in support of a COMNAVSECGRU program. I always enjoyed my time there. The guys there would take me to a swimming place called "Sharks Hole", "Two Lovers Leap" and even down to "Tweed's Cave". Do you know the "Tweed" story? I am sure that you can find it on Google. OBTW - I'm retired Army.
WOW. Stunning.
OBTW - Navy or Air Force.
You raise an interesting point that I am trying to get my head around. I am considering buying a new camera. Currently. I have a Nikon D7100 DX and am considering either the DX D500 or FX D850. Initially I was drawn to the D850 for among other reasons the 45+ mp sensor. But from what you have suggested I now believe the actual the pixel density across the smaller DX sensor image of the D500 will be a bit higher than the pixel density across the larger D850 image. So keeping all other factors the same, does the D500 provide equal or perhaps greater resolution?
riceman wrote:
The simple answer to your question is yes. You effectively convert your camera to a DX crop sensor camera. But I believe your pixel density remains the same so if your FF sensor has 45.7 mp over a 24x36mm sensor, in DX mode you now have 56% fewer pixels (56% smaller sensor area) so only 20.3 mp. As was noted, it’s like cropping your photo, only in-camera and not post.
My thanks to all who responded to my question about adding an ultra wide lens to my kit. I expected (actually hoped for) there to be a clear consensus about the way to go. Instead, I got dozens of great ideas arising from your collective experience. I now have several more options to pursue before I make any purchase or purchases. Thank you all.
On a sort of unrelated note, you might recall that I was planning to add a Nikon D500 to my D7100. So when opening the Nikon website, what pops up but the new D850. Yeah I saw the price and I know it is an FX body and the 7100 is a DX platform. Of my two current lenses, one is specifically DX and the 50mm prime is FX. Both are significant upgrades from the kit lenses by the way. Good glass.
One of the D850 specifications which I initially thought compelling was the 45+mp sensor. But when I considered that the image size of the FX was 2.7 times larger than the DX image, I realized the the pixel density of the D850 was some what smaller than that of the D500. So if all ofter factors are held constant, would not the D500 be able to provide the same resolution as the 850? Does pixel density matter? Am am I nuts to go from DX to FX? OBTW - I consider myself a wanna-be enthusiast .
Grandkids' events indoors, both photos and video, home interiors, and landscapes.
Note to all: Wow, this was my first time posting a question and I hadn't expected such quick and outstanding answers. Thanks to all.
I want to add an ultra wide to my existing lenses which I now use with my D7100. The question I have for you much more experienced folks is - do I go with the Nikkor 12-24mm f/4 AF-S DX, the Nikkor 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 AF-S ED-G DX, or the Nikkor 10-20mm AF-P DX VR. I am leaning toward the 10-20 AF-P. The price is certainly one discriminant but so is the VR capability absent on the other two. But will the AF-P function without limitation on my D7100? I am also planning to add a D500 on which I believe the AF-P will work without limitation. I appreciate any and all advice you may provide. Thanks.