Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000
I have used a D7000 for 2 years now and about 2 weeks ago my camera and myself went swimming when a rock gave way. The lens was shot my camera seemed to of survived so far. While I was waiting for my 7000 to dry out, I started looking for a new camera right away. Even though I put the camera and the lens in rice to dry out, I had no hope for them, considering the amount of water that pored out of the lens. I invested in a D600 because of it being a full frame. Then I started hearing of the dust problem and have read reviews saying that the 7000 is every bit as good as the 600 and that you shouldn't waste your money. So when my camera seemed to be o.k. I started considering a good lens instead. I had a salesman at a very reputable camera shop, who has sold Nikons for years, tell me that if I would put a full frame lens on my Dx camera it would perform as well as the 600 with the full frame lens. This doesn't make sense to me. My thinking is that the 7000 was made to shoot Dx and it's sensor was made to preform with the Dx lens, so I should get the best results or at least the same results, when comparing the two with an equal lens on each camera Dx on the 7000 and full frame on the 600. Please tell me if I am wrong. Because If by putting a full frame lens on the Dx camera I would be getting the same results as the 600 then I would be inclined to opt for a good full frame lens and keep my 7000 body for as long as it holds out.
Can anybody help me clear this up? I am not a professional, I would consider my self a semi-amateur who is still learning but I am very picky about the quality of my pictures.
#1. "RE: Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000" | In response to Reply # 0WildIsle Nikonian since 06th Jan 2010Fri 01-Feb-13 04:00 AM
It's a bit of an apples and oranges situation here. Given that you're a fruit lover and are looking for a tasty treat, the actual flavour isn't as important as overall quality and satisfaction.
And to that end the D7000 certainly belongs in the fruit bowl alongside the D600. But at the end of the day the D7000 is a 16MP DX camera nearing the end of its life in Nikon's active product line whereas the D600 as you know is a 24MP full frame FX camera released only months ago.
They have lots of similarities and share some technologies principally auto-focus and the main control dial. But there are also significant differences and improvements in the D600, not the least of them being the larger FX sensor.
The salesman isn't far off saying you'll get every bit as good performance out of an FX lens on the D7000 vs the D600 but it's not the full story by any means. Sure for most use the average viewer couldn't tell the difference but in practice for the photographer the field of view is different, the depth of field different and the final images have more dynamic range and greater pixel density from the FX D600.
I could go on but the bottomline is that your inclination to buy a good FX lens and keep the D7000 for now sounds fine. Clearly you are FX-curious and when the D7000 has either given up the ghost or you're ready anyway to invest in an FX body you'll have a great FX lens to go with it.
Yes FX glass works fine on DX bodies (given the differences noted above) but DX glass on an FX body not so much.
In no way would you be 'wasting your money' on a D600 though. It is an awesome camera - but then it is twice the price of a D7000 so it better be!
#5. "RE: Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000" | In response to Reply # 1cheesie Registered since 29th Jan 2013Sat 02-Feb-13 02:30 PM
Thank you for your replies. It makes better sense to me now. I decided to hit the trail and test the results. What I found is exactly what everybody here has told me. I can see the difference, the average person probably wouldn't. But then again the average person doesn't see wires going through a picture or trees growing out of the heads of the subjects or even shadows being cast when they were not suppose to be there. (flash caused)
Being outside the light changes constantly so I feel that I have some more tests to do, if I am going to be fair to the camera's.
Knowing the difference and seeing the difference I don't know if I will be happy with anything less than the 600 but on the other hand I am trying to be friendly to my pocket.
Thanks so much for every bodies help. I will let everybody know what I have decided and why.
#2. "RE: Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000" | In response to Reply # 0
Welcome to Nikonians!
If you place an FX lens on a D7000, you will not get the same Image Quality as using the same lens on the D600.
The D600 has more dynamic range, more color bit depth, and better high ISO performance, and more resolution than the D7000.
DX sensors (23,6mm x 15.6mm) are smaller than an FX sensor (36mm x 24mm), DX lenses are designed to project a smaller image circle on the sensor plane.
This allows DX lenses to be smaller, lighter, and less expensive than FX lenses because the lens elements can be much smaller in diameter so the require less (expensive)optical glass than an FX lens of the same focal length.
Since FX lenses are designed to project an image circle large enough to cover an FX sensor they will be sharper in the corners and vignette less than a DX lens when used on a DX body.
Good Luck and Enjoy your Nikons!
#3. "RE: Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000" | In response to Reply # 0
I had a similar question a few months ago. I decided to make my own answer by renting a D600 with a good zoom lens and test the results compared to my D7000 with the same lens at comparable focal lengths.
Using a tripod, I shot several scenes with the 24-70 f/2.8 and used both cameras. On the D600 I would set it to 50mm and then set up the D7000 with the lens zoomed to about 35mm to provide nearly equivalent composition.
For me, the difference was obvious and in favour of the D600 in every case. It was easy to pick the D600 shot in side-by-side comparisons on the monitor or with prints. I was convinced and bought the D600.
Some people might not see (or need) the difference.
#4. "RE: Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000" | In response to Reply # 0
I agree with the advice you've already been given.
Having both a D7000 and D600 myself another big difference in favour of the latter is high ISO noise (or lack of it). If that's important to you the D600 blows the D7000 out of the water (no pun intended).
Another feature of the D600 that is greatly improved is the focal length aware Auto ISO for shutter speed, I find that very useful!
Really though both are great cameras and it comes down to what you want to shoot and how much you value the extra features and IQ?
As for lenses you are really in for a larger investment moving to full frame and that's something to consider. What the salesman told you is partly true in so much as the very best lenses are often FX and the best lenses will give you better better results on FX and DX bodies, but the D7000 with the very best lens won't compete with the same lens on the D600 at say ISO3200 for example. At base ISO in good light things even out though.
Visit: My Nikonians Gallery
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#6. "RE: Question about the D600 lens performance on a D7000" | In response to Reply # 0
> Then I started hearing of the dust problem and have read reviews
We all do, but I would take all those reviews with a grain of salt on the dust issue. IMO, the D7000 is not going to keep up with a D600 in image quality and high ISO situations, though it may never make a difference in your type of photography.
Sticking FX lenses on DX - no issue except for the crop factor. As an aside, I really like having my 24mm lens give me the same perspective I have with film since I still shoot both mediums.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof " - Carl Sagan