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
ajd1170

Colorado Springs, US
61 posts

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

"RE: FX vs DX"

ajd1170 Silver Member Nikonian since 02nd Apr 2004
Sat 16-Mar-13 12:49 AM

As are many others in these forums, I am looking for your expert input regarding choice of equipment. I fully understand the physics regarding sensor size, pixel count, and photosite size as they relate to IQ i.e. noise and resolution. Although I have been keeping current on the latest discussions, I find that I am unable to come to a decision regarding purchasing the D7100 DX (assuming user experience is good), or another FX body.

Here is my situation. Among other bodies, I have a D2x, and a D700 which is my primary body at this time. I have a mix of DX and FX glass. I intend to sell my present DX bodies and purchase a new body to backup or at least compliment my D700.

My widest lens at this time is the DX Nikkor 12-24 which may or may not work on my D700. I have a Nikkor 300 f2.8 and a Nikkor 600 f4.0, which I use when out to shoot wildlife, and which accept some of the numerous TCs I possess. However, these two beasts are too much to carry around when hiking along trails to shoot landscapes. Thus, my longest carry-around glass right now is the FX Nikkor 70-300 f4.5-5.6, which doesn't accept Nikon TCs.

I'm sorry for being so verbose, but after all that, here is the question: Do I opt for a D7100 24mp, which gives my the DX 1.5 crop factor plus the option to use the additional 1.3 crop factor giving me extra reach and a higher resolution image even at the larger crop factor than I can get with the D700 12mp, and without the need of the use of TCs (I frequently print at 19x13), but sacrifice the wide angle range, or do I go with another FX body and purchase a Nikkor such as the 17-35 f2.8 or the 16-35 f4 VR? The f2.8 max aperture is not essential, the VR would be nice, and the price differential is substantial. Budget is a major consideration.

Again, I apologize for the length of this post, but is the best I could do to explain my predicament.

Thanks in advance for all your advice.

A. J.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

This is a hot, active topic! FX vs DX [View all] , sirraj , Mon 11-Mar-13 10:27 AM
Subject
ID
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
1
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
2
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
3
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
4
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
5
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
6
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
7
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX
8
          Reply message RE: FX vs DX
14
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
9
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
13
     Reply message A failure to understand equivalence...
18
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX
36
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
10
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
11
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX
12
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX
15
          Reply message RE: FX vs DX
16
               Reply message RE: FX vs DX
17
               Reply message RE: FX vs DX
19
               Reply message RE: FX vs DX
37
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX
22
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
20
Reply message Very briefly Bryan...
21
     Reply message RE: Very briefly Bryan...
23
          Reply message I don't follow your landscape calculations Jon...
24
               Reply message RE: I don't follow your landscape calculations Jon...
25
               Reply message Don't you mean angels?
27
               Reply message RE: I don't follow your landscape calculations Jon...
26
                    Reply message Well, Jon...
28
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
29
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
30
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
38
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
31
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
32
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
33
Reply message RE: FX vs DX
34
     Reply message RE: FX vs DX
35