Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Nikon FX or DX camera D750 or D7200

  1. #21
    Senior Member sammy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    1,568

    Default Re: Nikon FX or DX camera D750 or D7200

    Oh damn... I erase an entire long message when i added the matt granger !!!!!..Ahhh I forgot I was in edit mode and not a new message. too lazy to rethink and type it.

    Well I had a link in that deleted message pointing to FX & DX mode which you can still click to read.

    http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/...-fx-again.html

    Teleconverter.. okay I am not going to write it all again...Just remember ... why do you or most experience shooter think Prime lens are better then Zoom lens? Same reason why TC are something you not use if you can afford not to. It is the difference between a real sports car and a poor man's sport car. Take a photo with a 2X TC with a 200mm and then shot the same shot with a true 400mm. You can see the difference when you zoom in close. So far I know of people who do use TC and what they tend to buy are the Nikon 1.4X or 1.7X. they rather try to balance it out with a longer zoom that their pocket can handle it and also how much quality they are will to live with using the TC/Lens combo.

    Anyhooo.... lots of YouTube videos on all these subject out there.



    OH GREAT!!..... Clunsnap has a feature that keeps the original version which i salvage hehe.. So the naggy long version below.



    hehehe.. it is all about science and the limitation of optical physic and where technology are presently at moving forward. If you think that is hard on you to understand. Try maybe this long form explanation for geeks on DX and FX. I like long read, it clears a lot but some lke it short but you hardly get the gist of it. And also if you are into geeky science. But I think learning those basic science stuff set you on good foundation on buying your next body or lens. To me anyway.

    http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/...-fx-again.html

    Teleconverters... generally how they work or not work goes back to the fundamental of glass quality and how light image move thru glass(es). To break it down to basics, the more elements you put in the path of light, the more flaws distortion and diffraction of light there will be. And that also depending on how good the manufacturer is at producing the elements.

    You find many YouTube videos on this subject if video helps you better then reading. Suffice to say, teleconverters introduces distortion as the magnification goes up, more complicated elements and designs are introduce to the lens. A 1.4X teleconverter cause less distortion then a 2X teleconverter. So it is about you deciding how much sharpness/detail you willing to compromise VERSUS balancing it out with a shorter telephoto or longer one. It's like a real sports car versus a poor man's sport car. Yes I love analogy as it help me to visually see and explain things down to fundamental.

    For example you can buy a 2X TC to use on a 200mm to get 400mm or you can just go for it and buy a 400mm lens. But the quality you get from both this lens depending on what you shoot or how you love to pixel peep can be a nightmare heheh Everyone that wants to buy a teleconverter to save money has to come to term to the disadvantages of using a TC. There is no getting over this kind of science. Until they invent something better.

    As good as you think your glass is today use on sensor, at the micro level it is still not good enough when say you invent a sensor of 50 to 60 megapixel. You need even more refine and superior glass production to take advantage of that along side the algorithm that is use to extract the information of light hitting the sensor. So you know that old saying of how some old lens are still great used in some DSLR? It does not entirely hold true and it gets more so as camera evolve further with higher resolution. Ok maybe too geeky for this topic best I stop here heh. I think the link I gave does address some glass issue as well so have a good read. It's eye opening if you are really all about getting the highest quality from your choice of gear.Or add to your confusion more LOL

    In short depending on the reputation of the lens element maker aside, the more simplify and less elements used in a lens the better. Which will help you now see why primes are better then zoom lens for image detail, quality and sharpness. But remember when I am talking at this level of quality, we are splitting apples and orange at a level far past your average lens basic where the best and second best might be just a fraction apart. But that is what those stupid marketing plot are about isn't it ? Just that bit more and you have bragging right to owning the sharpest but if you are dumb ass shooter, you are still a dumb ass shooter if you don't know how to use that product to it's fullest. LOL. Btw I use to own a earlier Nikon 2X but was not too please with the details it capture and also it does not work on all lens that I have. Folks think you can use a TC on all lens. Use TC only on good lens not something average or the results will be less then what you might like.

    Teleconverters: Is the extra reach worth the penalties? https://youtu.be/_Q0pH86s_6g
    Last edited by sammy888; 5th December 2015 at 04:05 AM.
    A good photo's 45% you, 45% practice & 10% equipment. A bad photo share the same ratio.

  2. #22
    Moderator ortega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    23,686
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default Re: Nikon FX or DX camera D750 or D7200

    Quote Originally Posted by orionct View Post
    Hi,

    Have been using D90 for a long while and thinking is time to upgrade.
    Not sure if I should upgrade to full frame FX but most I do is travel photography so camera weight might be a concern for me.
    Recently looking at the latest flagship model D750 vs D7200 (or D7100) both have their strength, of course price is the major difference too.
    Feel free to comment and enlighten me for consideration.
    Thanks for whoever that comment.


    both a good cameras, from your signature, i see that you already have some lenses, I would guess that the 12/24 is a DX lens?
    if you are looking at weight then going staying with DX and using DX lenses will costs less and weigh less too.

    If the D90 is not holding your photography back, I would suggest replacing your 18-105mm lens instead of buying a new camera body.

  3. #23

    Default Re: Nikon FX or DX camera D750 or D7200

    I had a D90, and at that time, I had a choice of D7000 or D750. So I went ahead to try the D750. It's heavier and more expensive, and that applies to lenses too.
    So if you wish to keep your current lenses, the D7200 is a pretty good camera.
    I don't really have any big issues with my D750, and I believe either will work well. Cost, and whether you shoot more wide-angle vs telephoto plus the weigh issue are what you want to factor in, cheers.
    Nikon D750; FM2; FG; 55mm Micro Nikkor; 28-300 VR; 70-200 VR; Nikon V1 + 10-30mm

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •