If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens.
Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. Appreciate any feedback. -- Nige Danton - Replace the obvious with g.m.a.i.l |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
On 10/04/2013 08:10, Nige Danton wrote:
I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. Appreciate any feedback. My take is that weight is important. I once used (for a few minutes) an FX camera (Nikon D800) with wide range zoom (28 - 300 mm). Compared to my DX D5000 with 18-200 mm zoom it was /awfully/ heavy. Maybe that doesn't bother you, though. I do see a trend towards smaller quality cameras, although some folk say that the days of DX are numbered, but I'm not convinced about that. If your problem is low-light, check image stabilisation and shutter speed. Allow the ISO to drift up a little. Are your shots with the lens fully open no better than those from your P&S? Yes, full-frame will be better in low-light than DX given the same lens f/number. For my lowest light shots, I bought the 35 mm f/1.8 DX lens, and photographed the northern lights hand-held. Yes, a tripod would have been better, as would longer exposures, but from a moving ship? http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2010/No...0435-05-a.html I even managed to make a couple of short real-time videos: http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2010/No...NorthernLights and it amuses me that when you see the lights on TV, they are almost never real-time videos, just speeded-up long exposure shots. That, with all their heavy and expensive professional gear! G -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
Nige Danton wrote:
I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. Kit lenses are never the best. And no 5x zoom is either. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. Probably due to slow shutter speeds? I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. Given what you say below... Most macro lenses are FX lenses, so that would probably not need to affect a decision about a new camera body. Also note that DX is not necessarily a disadvantage when doing macro work. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. If you are considering either 1) a move to an FX body, *or* 2) a professional level camera body, *or* 3) a need specifically for professional level lenses: Buy professional level lenses regardless of which camera you now use. Most if not all of Nikon's top quality lenses are FX as opposed to DX. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. If cost is not the issue, then functionality should be the top priority. Given the camera you have is a pretty good example of a DX body, I would put lenses at the top of the list. But if you can swing it, buy an FX body soon. For what you have described, the D4 would not be as useful as a D800 or D600, but you haven't really said what else you shoot. I use both a D4 and a D800, and if I could only have one it would be the D4. Despite that, 75% of what I do is done with the D800 because it has more pixels. The D4 is far better for sports or PJ type work. I would think that having either a D4 or a D800, plus the D7000 as a second camera would be very functional. I use a 24-120mm f/4 as a walk around lense, and usually have either a 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII or an 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 on the second camera. Depending on what your work entails, something similar would give you a great deal more versatility that what you have now. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:10:59 +0000 (UTC), Nige Danton
wrote: I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. First, try the no cost solution of either bumping the iso up and/or trying the auto-iso function to allow you to do it with some additional control. What shutter/f.l. combos are you shooting. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
On 10 Apr 2013 in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems, Nige Danton wrote:
I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. I have a D7000, and I've found that I can get acceptable to very good results up to about ISO 1600, so try shooting at a higher ISO. snip My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. snip Appreciate any feedback. What is the ultimate destination of the pictures? If you're printing and blowing up your pictures substantially, there might be some merit to an FX camera. If you're going mainly to screen, and not taking small crops out of the center of the image, DX should work fine. -- Joe Makowiec http://makowiec.org/ Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
In article
-september. org, Nige Danton wrote: I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. increase the iso or buy a faster lens. the former is a *lot* less expensive (as in free) than the latter, so try that first. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. are they handheld? if so, that's probably camera shake. get a tripod or monopod, or increase the iso so you can use a faster shutter speed. another possibility is that you aren't post-processing them properly. I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. many options there. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. nothing you've said so far suggests an fx camera would solve your problems. also keep in mind you can buy fx lenses now in case you think you might change to fx at some point in the future. if you do switch to fx, your 18-105 would need to be replaced since it's a dx lens, but it isn't an expensive lens so it doesn't matter that much, and it would actually work on an fx camera, but with the fx camera in crop mode. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. spend more time learning the d7000. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
"Nige Danton" wrote in message ... I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. Appreciate any feedback. -- Nige Danton - Replace the obvious with g.m.a.i.l Excellent photos can be taken with a DX camera when set up and used properly. Having said that, with money as no object, I'd go FX. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
On 2013.04.10 03:10 , Nige Danton wrote:
I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. There is nothing like getting more out of what you have in hand. The more you strive to get more from it the more likely you are to find the real limits of the DX camera. If those are real barriers to your goals, then FX is next. As David Taylor said, look at how the ISO range may benefit you, stabilization (heck: have you tried a tripod), appropriate aperture and so on (shoot a couple stops closed for more sharpness - sacrifice thin DOF). Of course where purchasing is concerned, you can always mount FX lenses to DX cameras so that if you do go the FX route one day nothing will have been lost (I did exactly so before Sony finally came out with a FF body). Of course such lenses are often more expensive. A friend has stuck to DX and now is in a quandary because the price of a 14mm lens is so high. Had he gone with FX he would have been able to use his existing 20mm kit. -- "There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office." -Sir John A. Macdonald |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
On 4/10/2013 12:10 AM, Nige Danton wrote:
I'm in a bit of a quandary. I've currently got a D7000 and an 18-105 lens. Ive recently (this year) switched back to SLR's after a decade of using digital point and shoot. I'm certainly pleased with D7000, but am finding the 18-105 to be a bit too slow in low light (indoors without flash) and am thinking of buying a faster lens. Also I've found some of the (cropped) images to be not quite as sharp as I would like. This mainly seems to occur in low light shots. I'm also keen to try some macro photography too, and have been thinking about a macro lens, perhaps extension tubes or even a bellows. My quandary is this. I'm not (at all) sure that I'm satisfied with a DX format and really don't want to buy new lenses and accessories and then find myself needing to re-buy them if/when I buy an FX body. So, what do you think. Should I spend more time and practise getting the best out of my D7000 or switch to an FX body now? Cost is not particular issue - that said I don't want to be wasteful. Appreciate any feedback. If you are able to afford the changeover then without question the FX is the way to go. In any event, consider procuring FX type lenses in lieu of DX type lenses. However, be aware that FX lenses being much larger than DX lenses may interfere with using the cameras built-in flash. A flash to seriously consider obtaining is the Nikon SB700. Yep, having a couple or three of them won't hurt at all. Spaced in a suitable manner one just might or could light-up a museum hall. I suppose it may be of some interest to you as to what I use and am very satisfied with using as working equipment set-ups, varying lenses as needed at the time of photographing a scene. I generally use a Nikon 17-35 f2.8 lens on my FX camera and a 24-120 f4 (full frame) lens on my DX camera, switching cameras as the lens befits the scene I intend to capture. All my lenses, except one, are FX lenses. The DX lens was a gift. My overall suggestion would be to plan your procurement on eventually obtaining an FX camera and/or getting into using FX lenses and support equipment (whatever they may be). As in the case with using film of a bygone era, bigger is better. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quandary - DX or FX?
On 4/10/2013 3:13 PM, nick c wrote:
Snip I generally use a Nikon 17-35 f2.8 lens on my FX camera and a 24-120 f4 (full frame) lens on my DX camera, switching cameras as the lens befits the scene I intend to capture. All my lenses, except one, are FX lenses. The DX lens was a gift. Correction: Actually, I have two DX lenses. I bought a Nikon 18-55mm kit lens (kept in another bag) for $60 to use on the beach, whenever I get to the beach. If I ever drop it in the sand or in salt water, it's a gonner. But for $60, well ..... (shrug) Snip |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon Quandary: D60 or D200? | SteveG | Digital SLR Cameras | 2 | January 22nd 09 02:28 PM |
Nikon Quandary: D60 or D200? | nospam | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | January 21st 09 10:16 AM |
Compression quandary / question | Earl Misanchuk | Digital Photography | 4 | September 15th 06 07:52 PM |
Tele-extender quandary: 1.4x or 2x | Norm Dresner | Digital SLR Cameras | 17 | June 12th 05 06:41 AM |