I appreciate the feedback I got regarding longer lenses for my new D610, my first FX body. I have good primes from the 20mm to the 105mm, six in all. I had nothing longer than my 105mm Micro. You collectively urged me to think about a longer zoom. I took your advice and ordered 70-300.
I have a brother who has gone from the D5100 to the D7000 and it a better photographer than me as far as composition goes. And he has been a zoom man with the exception of one low light prime, a 35mm or 50mm not sure. He is thinking of taking the FX plunge and wanted to see how his DX zooms looked on the D610 with it set to auto detect a DX lens.
I have to say I was very surprised at the quality of those images. My FX lenses shoot a RAW file of about 30 meg and the DX ones come out to about 13-14 meg. I know it is half the size, but we don't need a very long memory to know we were elated when a 12 meg file was the top-of-the-line.
I know from our forums here, and seeing other reviews, that FX dedicated f/2.8 and lower lenses are well better than DX only lenses on any FX body. Actually having see my brother's lenses on my FX body, I am not so sure that there are DX "only" lenses any more when the D610 can detect them automatically and produce a very good 12 meg RAW file.
Clearly not what you want on the shorter focal length end when the FX shines. But if you want a "decent", not professional telephoto lens, the DX mode and an almost 15 meg file ain't bad. I should say I do not normally print bigger than 16x20, usually 8x10, so a 15 meg file is fine with "decent DX" glass. Or so it seems.
Just an observation that might be useful to someone trending to try a FX body and thinking all their DX lenses would be unworthy. Shorter DX lense are not so good, but longer ones seem actually not so bad. Sure points out to me where the new glass dollars might go in terms of focal length if one was a DX body user and switched to FX. Short first and longer later would be my advice.
Because Attitude is Everything
#2. "RE: D610 with DX Lens" | In response to Reply # 0briantilley Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003Wed 27-Nov-13 07:31 PM
The use of the term "meg" suggests there may be some confusion between Megapixels (MP) and Megabytes (MB).
In its DX crop mode, the D600/D610 produce an image of (near enough) 10.3MP. That doesn't vary - it depends only on the relative size of the full FX frame and cropped DX frame. The image file size (in MB) depends on many factors, including whether the shot is NEF or JPEG and the degree of compression, as well as whether crop mode is engaged.
Regarding lenses, a DX lens can certainly help to ease the migration path from a DX to an FX camera, but speaking personally I would not consider one as a long-term solution, not would I pay more for an FX camera if I were intending to use only DX lenses on it
#3. "RE: D610 with DX Lens" | In response to Reply # 2msohio Nikonian since 13th Jun 2013Wed 27-Nov-13 08:15 PM
Brian...You are so right. The easing of the migration path is short lived. Once you put a FX lens on the full frame body, it is like redoing one shrub in the yard. Before you know it, there is a full-up nursery truck in front of the house, and it is all for you....Mike
Because Attitude is Everything
#4. "RE: D610 with DX Lens" | In response to Reply # 2shipsdrummer Nikonian since 29th Mar 2006Thu 28-Nov-13 02:51 PM | edited Thu 28-Nov-13 04:27 PM by shipsdrummer
Brian, this is the point I'm at now. I'm planning on moving from a D90 to D610 and until funds are built back up, I'll have to use my 16-85mm DX zoom. I currently own the 50mm f1.8D as well as the 70-300mm VR so I won't be completely relying on a DX lens, but I'd love to find a sharp-affordable 35mm prime to keep on the 610.
"Burn Slowly the Candle of Life"
#5. "RE: D610 with DX Lens" | In response to Reply # 4ericbowles Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Sat 30-Nov-13 12:07 PM
Keep in mind the DX lens on an FX camera means that your viewfinder is very different. The DX lens edges are marked with a small line on an FX viewfinder. The line outlines an image of less tha half the viewfinder. Edges are much harder to use, and getting an AF point on an eye or close focused subject becomes much more difficult. It's okay in an emergency, but I find the solution to be a problem.
Of course, older FX lenses may not provide good alternatives. I have an old Tamron 28-200 from the film days. When I tried it on my D600 I discarded all the images - just far too soft to be acceptable on a 24 mp image.
I would sell the 16-85 in favor of a used FX alternative - maybe the 24-85 since there are a lot available.
2014 Workshops - Spring in the Smokies
Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera