Wed 26-Sep-12 07:09 AM | edited Wed 26-Sep-12 01:10 PM by km6xz
The higher cost of a FX system is the main reason there is a fairly clear line dividing FX and DX ownership. There are benefits to both, and limitations that are mitigated by the other. The assumption of better imaging results from FX by users of DX is sometimes misplaced or exaggerated. There are differences but the biggest difference I believe is that FX users tend to have more experience with photography and have to be pretty serious about their craft to invest as much in lenses as FX requires. The basis for that conclusion rests primarily on how the same shooters display such nice images from FX, also do it when using their DX cameras. In both formats, we have cameras that far exceed the capabilities of their users to fully exploit the technical performance available to them. I think people switch cameras way too quickly and often, well before they have exhausted the capabilities of their prior camera that still has a lot to teach. The D7000 is a good case in point, it is the best imaging device ever in the crop sensor size, better than pro cameras costing much more just a few years ago. The big steps in advancing in the craft tend to be related to learning rather than buying. A weekend workshop on flash or birds in flight or whatever ones special interest is, will almost always improve the quality of images more than a new camera or lens. Given better lighting or better camera, the wise money is on the better lighting will produce results that are most noticeable and appreciated by viewers. Is FX for you, or anyone asking this question now? It really depends on your goals and effort you wish to invest in the craft. If you are selling your images, it is doubtful that there will be any increase in value of selling price in your images if you make the $5000++ step up in investment. For a hobbyist, the choice is more of "want" rather than need, and comes down to disposable income that if used for a camera does not harm the family budget. For a pro, it is a simpler call. Does buying higher cost FX increase my income more than the cost of acquiring and maintaining the new system? If a pro is looking at it as a true business choice, it is unlikely that they could justify the major expense but a bit of the hobbyist in everyone comes out and "want" is usually injected into the calculation to sway the decision. So what do you expect to get from a change? Will that change make a visual difference that is important? When we look at images in galleries or in museums and admire them, their compelling nature seldom has anything to do with what camera was used, but what we perceive is greatly influenced by things that are free: composition, perspective, concept, lighting and esthetics. You will care what lens or body was used.. You might be curious about those facts but you know that reproducing such an image would be aided by having the same gear.
This is long answer to a question that many will answer in 1 line but this one asks for you to evaluate what you expect and how you intend to put any differences, real or imagined, to use to make a visual difference. Stan St Petersburg Russia