Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising

FX vs DX and Wide Angle

Valentino

US
11613 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author

"RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle"

Valentino Awarded for high level skills in landscape and wildlife photography Registered since 04th Dec 2004
Wed 02-Jul-08 02:40 PM | edited Wed 02-Jul-08 02:43 PM by Valentino

I started this thread to address the wide end and prefer not to dilute with comments about the long end --- which might be better if you started a separate post addressing the pros and cons of each at the long end. But, I will address some of the above below.

You wrote: The need for a longer lens on FX to achieve the same FOV is to some degree offset by the better noise performance. Adding a 1.4 TC loses you a stop of light, but for exposure purposes you can increase the ISO a stop and get about the same noise performance as the DX at one stop less ISO and sans TC.

The need to increase ISO is only true if your subject is not moving and you are not using a tripod. If not then compensating for the 1-stop light loss of a TC by increasing ISO a stop is valid and means that FX must give just as clean results as DX at one stop higher ISO --- and it certainly does. I suspect that for many, whether you ar eusing FX or Dx, that your lenses are probably maxed out which is why you own them. I frequently am maxed out using my 1.4x TC on my 70-200 and 120-300 f/2.8 with a TC and still want more. For landscape I want to go to 300mm Dx (450 FX) or longer if I am doing landscape extractions or want to include a large fireball in my composition where I use filters and 70-200 + 1.4x TC. For wildlife, most shooters always want more, even if they had a 600mm f/4 on DX

Albert J Valentino
Nikonian Moderator Emeritus

Vantage Point Images
Mastery of Composition is the Key to Great Photography

This is a hot, active topic! FX vs DX and Wide Angle [View all] , Valentino Awarded for high level skills in landscape and wildlife photography , Wed 02-Jul-08 11:28 AM
Subject
ID
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
1
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
2
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
3
          Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
4
          Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
6
          Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
7
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
5
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
8
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
9
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
10
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
11
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
12
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
13
Reply message As wide as it gets on DX
14
Reply message RE: As wide as it gets on DX
15
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
16
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
17
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
18
          Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
19
               Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
20
               Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
21
               Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
23
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
22
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
24
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
25
Reply message RE: FX vs DX and Wide Angle
26