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

DX vs FX on the D600

briantilley

Paignton, UK
30235 posts

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

"RE: DX vs FX on the D600"

briantilley Gold Member Deep knowledge of bodies and lens; high level photography skills Donor Ribbon awarded for his support to the Fundraising Campaign 2014 Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003
Sun 28-Oct-12 05:38 PM | edited Sun 28-Oct-12 05:38 PM by briantilley


Your prime requirement seems to be "reach" - which in this case equates to the number of pixels a given (small) subject will cover.

Let's say that you've got the longest lens you own with a TC on the camera, and the image of the bird is still only 1/4 inch across on the sensor. Using your D7000, it will cover about 1,325 pixels horizontally. If you change to a D600 but keep everything else the same, the bird will cover only 1,060 pixels - 20% fewer.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian

A general, generic topic DX vs FX on the D600 [View all] , mrginhop Silver Member , Sun 28-Oct-12 01:00 PM
Subject
ID
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
1
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
2
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
3
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
4
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
5
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
6
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
7
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
8
Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
9
     Reply message RE: DX vs FX on the D600
10