Overkill?

[Psychoric]

Good day.
Is it overkill to use FX lens on a DX body?
Such as a 70-200 on a D300?

 

[ChongK]

Of course it won't be over kill, its just how much u are willing to spent on FX lens
like a 50mm f1.8 i don't think its a over kill for D300.
Like a 70-200mm, as long you are happy with the IQ, overkill does not matter.


cheers

 

[catchlights]

technically, Nikon only have DX lens, don't have FX lens, FX is indicate Full Frame on the camera body.

and it is not waste to use 70-200 on a DX body, since Nikon don't have a DX version of 70-200 lens.

 

[skazwan]

and just to add on with the 1.5x crop factor it will be equivalent to 105-300mm

 

[catohcat]

Good day.
Is it overkill to use FX lens on a DX body?
Such as a 70-200 on a D300?

The 70-200 VR1 is invented when Nikon did not have FX digital camera yet. The infact the lens was optimized for DX cameras at the time. Therefore it is the best bet for your D300.

For D700 onwards, it's the upcoming 70-200 VRII

 

[Blur Shadow]

I hardly would think so. Besides, there isn't a DX equivalent to the 70-200mm VR f/2.8 anyway. This lens has known vignetting problems on FX though.

 

[anuar ahmad]

Long before DX lenses with the smaller image circle appeared on the market, Nikon was producing lenses to accomodate the 36 x 24mm (FX on D3 & D700 and Kodak DCS14N) format 35mm film cameras. Some good some bad.

DSLR with smaller imaging sensor is just a progression of photographic imaging technology.

So it shouldn't be.

 

[PhotoTime]

Why is there an overkill? Do you know that for most of the lens, the sweetest spot is around the center of the lens? Therefore, when using 70-200 lens on an DX sensor, most of the image will be sharp.

 

[Psychoric]

Hmm.
So for a D300 with a 70-200, the closest focusing distance will be 2.25 metres while for a 24-70 it will 0.57 metres?

 

[yyD70S]

The minimum focus distance of the lens is indepedent of the DSLR (FX / DX).

For the AFS 70-200mm f2.8, MFD for AF is 1.5m