I'm currently using a D2x and D300s and plan to add a D600 early next year. I'd like to know if the dx crop is good enough to do away is dx bodies? Is the crop similar to the D700's crop where the dx outline is a red rectangle displaying the area? Do I keep one of my dx bodies? I like dx for the extra reach, especially with the Sigma 150-500 OS but could have it both ways in one body.
That's a good question. I had/have a D300s prior to ordering a D600. I thought long and hard about it but ended up putting my D300s on consignment.
I know I'm losing the much faster frame rate and the AF sensor coverage (these being the main ones for me). But gaining the much better low light performance and perspective of FX (again my main reasons for moving to FX).
Just before I got my D600 I had a week long wildlife photography cruise on the BC Central Coast. The reach and frame rate of the D300s was as always a great advantage but when it came down to reviewing results critically the low light noise was just too much to stay with.
Now it's winter it'll be a few months until I get back to the wildlife and I know it will take a bit of an adjustment in shooting to get the most out of the D600 but the low noise and dynamic range I know are going to blow the D300s out of the water. So I'm okay with what admittedly was a difficult decision.
Having said that I will be keeping my D5100 as my lightweight body for hiking & climbing etc...
>I'm currently using a D2x and D300s and plan to add a D600 >early next year. I'd like to know if the dx crop is good >enough to do away is dx bodies? Is the crop similar to the >D700's crop where the dx outline is a red rectangle displaying >the area? Do I keep one of my dx bodies? I like dx for the >extra reach, especially with the Sigma 150-500 OS but could >have it both ways in one body.
Honestly, it would make a LOT more sense do do one of the following:
1. Buy A D7000. Better low noise performance, better image quality, no loss of "reach".
2. Buy a D800. Better low noise performance, better image quality, slight increase in "reach" due to DX crop being over 15MP.
3. Buy a D600 and a 1.4x tele. Better low noise performance, better images quality, similar reach.
Doing a DX crop on a D600 makes very little sense to me.
I agree with Perrone - I see no advantage of using the DX crop over cropping in post processing, and would just get a DX camera if I wanted a crop most of the time.
The big disadvantage is the viewfinder is still FX, so the DX crop is composed using a smaller part of the viewfinder. It's not the same as viewing through a DX camera viewfinder where the viewfinder matches the image.
Given that a DX crop is smaller than a D300s image - and much smaller than a D7000 or D5200 image, you're just giving up too much.
Now the big positive of FX is since you are using a longer lens, you get much better subject isolation and a nicer background than the same scene with DX. If you have enough reach, I find FX to be more pleasing.
Sun 16-Dec-12 02:29 PM | edited Sun 16-Dec-12 02:32 PM by RRRoger
If you shoot a moving object, and sometimes even a stationary one, it makes more sense to crop afterwards. It is very difficult to get perfect framing in crop mode. The only advantage I see is file size.
The only advantage I see to owning a very fast DX camera is shooting little birds in flight. I would prefer an FX D4 for that
My rationale is that the D600 has the same mp as my D90 (more or less) so I do not think I am taking a step backward in mp since I still get the better dynamic range/iso performance even if I ran it in crop mode.