Downgrading from fx to dx ?

T

Thats my sock

Messages
456
Name
steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Has anyone downgraded from a fx to dx ? Did you regret it ? What was your reasoning ? I've a d750 that I've owned from new that due to working away gets very little use and at times think it's pointless having it just sit there.
 
Yes and no!
My photography is wildlife and so reach is high on the list of requirements ... I first tried a Nikon D7200 and the crop worked well for me and IQ is very good, though not as good as my D810. I then got my Nikon D500 which has superb AF and a very fast and large buffer, it is so noticeable when using any other camera I've tried and I haven't looked back. :)
 
I used a D800E for 4 years [had been using cropped sensors for years prior], and in that time some very nice FX lenses. But recently sold it all off and bought a Fuji XT-1 and a couple of lenses. I had the same issue, I had all this wonderful gear, gathering dust .... it had become a chore to just go shoot! Since I got the Fuji I'm much more relaxed about my photography, I feel my creative juices flowing again. It's no more about the gear, but about me! :) I'm back to being the hobbyist I enjoyed before I ever tried to get 'serious'

What do I miss? - Nothing! ... honestly. I loved the D800, but I always felt it had to have the best of the best lenses attaches to get the absoloute most from that beastly sensor. It was also awkward and cumbersome to just casually take out. It had become a thorn. I would only take it to very specific outings. I certainly do not miss having 6-7Kg on my back for just heading out for a walk or cycle!!

It's just gear. Once you have a capable set up that you can relate to, stop worrying about makes and models and even sensor sizes. I had gotten lazy with full frame tbh. I'd take shots and think 'I can crop the hell out of that later' - I am much more aware now of NOT doing this. And still finding my images are plenty good enough IQ-wise

Selling the FX gear helped me pay a lot of bills also, even after buying the Fuji start up.
 
Last edited:
Started d300 dx and upgraded to fx. After a couple of years I downgraded from d800 to d7100, there was a few regrets with regards to the viewfinder and focussing, but it felt so much more fun to use. Now gone to the d500 which feels fun but more than pro enough, more like my d300 again.
 
Thats my sock said:
Has anyone downgraded from a fx to dx ? Did you regret it ? What was your reasoning ? I've a d750 that I've owned from new that due to working away gets very little use and at times think it's pointless having it just sit there.
Click to expand...

Would you take an APS-C camera out more than you do your current kit? If you think you would I think it's will worth looking at what your existing kit is realistically worth and the purchase price of whatever you'd replace it with. It may make financial sense to move to APS-C, I don't know but if there's little difference perhaps there'd need to be a pretty good reason to justify going through the hassle of selling your stuff and buying new stuff... like any bulk and weight savings you may make by moving to APS-C.
 
Just bear in mind that the resale value of digital bodies may be lower than you expect, and that the range of explicitly DX lenses is quite weak.
 
I use FX, DX and CX and like them all for different reasons, DX is in my opinion the best option if you could only choose one system, my D7100 is a fabulous camera and the only shortcoming is its tiny buffer, I'd like a d500 but don't do enough wildlife work to justify the further expense.
 
Thats my sock said:
Has anyone downgraded from a fx to dx ? Did you regret it ? What was your reasoning ? I've a d750 that I've owned from new that due to working away gets very little use and at times think it's pointless having it just sit there.
Click to expand...
This all depends on what is important to you so it's a very difficult question to answer. I have the D750 too and have ran m4/3, and Fuji alongside it (I still have the Fuji), and also had extensive use of the D7000, D71000 and D7200 as well. None quite match the D750 overall imo, my images are invariably better with this camera than any of the others in both sharpness and noise. Also, the flexibility in post is noticeably greater with the D750, you can recover more shadows and highlights.

I ran extensive tests with the D7200 as I was considering getting a crop body as I shoot a lot of wildlife and thought it would be good to have the reach advantage. I ran tests both on tripod shooting controlled tests, and also real world shooting birds (same time and place, and same Tamron 150-600mm) and I found that I could crop the D750 more heavily and still get better results than the D7200. Therefore the D7200 offered no reach advantage over the D750 for me. YMMV. The D500 is supposed to be great, but unless you need the insane buffer and/or find the AF system in the D750 lacking (highly unlikely) the D500 is going to offer you no advantage, and is actually less MP than the D7200 and D750 so less room for cropping.

The other thing to consider is the VF, they are smaller and darker in most APS-C cameras, and also if you want one of the higher level APS-C DSLRs they're not much smaller than the D750, the D750 is actually quite small for FF. Therefore I doubt you'd take out one of these any more than the D750. If it's due to size and weight that you want to swap then you'd have to consider mirrorless. There are some great ones out there, but there are things to consider such as AF for moving subjects and in low light. There are a couple that supposedly match some DSLRs, but I haven't tried them and would need to see for myself.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I used a D800E for 4 years [had been using cropped sensors for years prior], and in that time some very nice FX lenses. But recently sold it all off and bought a Fuji XT-1 and a couple of lenses. I had the same issue, I had all this wonderful gear, gathering dust .... it had become a chore to just go shoot! Since I got the Fuji I'm much more relaxed about my photography, I feel my creative juices flowing again. It's no more about the gear, but about me! :) I'm back to being the hobbyist I enjoyed before I ever tried to get 'serious'

What do I miss? - Nothing! ... honestly. I loved the D800, but I always felt it had to have the best of the best lenses attaches to get the absoloute most from that beastly sensor. It was also awkward and cumbersome to just casually take out. It had become a thorn. I would only take it to very specific outings. I certainly do not miss having 6-7Kg on my back for just heading out for a walk or cycle!!

It's just gear. Once you have a capable set up that you can relate to, stop worrying about makes and models and even sensor sizes. I had gotten lazy with full frame tbh. I'd take shots and think 'I can crop the hell out of that later' - I am much more aware now of NOT doing this. And still finding my images are plenty good enough IQ-wise

Selling the FX gear helped me pay a lot of bills also, even after buying the Fuji start up.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's how I think too regarding having the best lenses to get the most from it, but tbh these days I'd rather take the family away for a short break than spend £500 plus on a lens.
 
frod said:
Just bear in mind that the resale value of digital bodies may be lower than you expect, and that the range of explicitly DX lenses is quite weak.
Click to expand...

Tokina 11-16 sigma 17-70 are all I'd need.
 
gramps said:
I don't have a single DX lens for my two DX bodies and see no reason to get one ... FX lenses work fine for me. :)
Click to expand...

If they were available they would be smaller, lighter and cheaper. But they're not.
 
Thats my sock said:
Yeah that's how I think too regarding having the best lenses to get the most from it, but tbh these days I'd rather take the family away for a short break than spend £500 plus on a lens.
Click to expand...

Just a comment on the quality of lenses and money.

I have a Sony A7 and image quality wise it's the best camera I've ever owned. I like using old manual film era lenses on it and although they can't stand up to comparison to modern lenses when pixel peeping wide open shots across the frame in isolation they do stand up to pixel peeping and even 100% crops look simply lovely. So what if they're not top of the DXO table for sharpness across the frame wide open... :D

I have manual primes, 24 and 28mm f2.8, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.2, f1.4 and f2.8 macro, 85mm f2 and 135mm f2.8 and the cost of them all and the adapter I need to use them will be a fraction of the cost of one modern Sony GM lens. I have 3 AF lenses too which I use when speed is important (when I'm with other people) but when I'm out by myself and the point is to enjoy photography, to enjoy the experience and the day and to get some nice pictures I usually choose the manual lenses.

When I had my Canon DSLR's I'd never have thought that I could have a FF camera and cover 24 to 135mm with nice primes for such a reasonable price :D
 
Yes but no...

I still have, love and use my D750/D700 FF kit but have a 3 body Fuji APS-C kit as well. There are some things that I can still do better with the FF DSLRs, although the Fujis could probably do them. I can also get a fair bit wider with the Nikons, especially since I have an 8mm fisheye. I was tempted by a Dx body to use for long tele stuff but then Fuji released the long awaited 100-400 so I got that instead!
 
I have slowly moved back to DX with the Fuji X system
Having 4 Full frame cameras 3 Nikon and 1 Canon plus a number of older DX bodies.
I really found with my disability I was becoming more reluctant to take a camera out with me when leaving the home :(
That's been unheard of in the past.
I put a post here on TP about down sizing to either a Fuji X or the Olympus 4/3 system and what to go for as my initial purchase of a Canon eos-m left more than a bit desired, in all honesty I couldn't fault the picture quality but low light left a lot to be desired for me.
I have really been enjoying my move over to the Fuji X system the weight size usability and picture quality are all I could have asked for and now I have a X- T2 I'm hoping to move on the bulk of my Nikon & Canon gear and the enormous arsenal of lenses I have accumulated over the years.
I can't comment on the X T2s ability but my previous bodies in the X system never felt quit good enough to replace a Dslr be it FF or DX.
What I do though is have a camera body and lens with me when ever I am able to venture outdoors:)
That is priceless for myself having been into photography most of my life and taking pictures.
:fuji: It's given me my passion back in life which has been photography.

I would suggest you give what ever you are thinking of changing too a good test and try out before making any purchase :) (y)
 
woof woof said:
When I had my Canon DSLR's I'd never have thought that I could have a FF camera and cover 24 to 135mm with nice primes for such a reasonable price :D
Click to expand...

Unless they are Pentax K mount, you could have used those same lenses on your Canon, long before Sony even thought of the A7 series ;)
 
Steve B said:
Unless they are Pentax K mount, you could have used those same lenses on your Canon, long before Sony even thought of the A7 series ;)
Click to expand...

Well... my favourite manual lenses and the ones I detailed above are Minolta Rokkor and I could have used them on Canon DSLR's with a corrective lens in the adapter but that would still leave the problem of focusing. I did briefly use some manual Olympus Zuiko lenses on my 5D but focus was a pain rather than the joy it is on the A7.
 
Last edited:
Although I've not got a Nikon any more the DX lens line-up still hasn't seen any new dedicated DX lenses.
When I did have my Nikon I owned the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 DX and that was one serious piece of glass.
Having just moved from FF down to APS-C it's been a positive move for me in terms of size, weight and £££.
I find it pointless using FF glass on a APS-C body if your looking to save weight etc.
 
Fuguru said:
Although I've not got a Nikon any more the DX lens line-up still hasn't seen any new dedicated DX lenses.
When I did have my Nikon I owned the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 DX and that was one serious piece of glass.
Having just moved from FF down to APS-C it's been a positive move for me in terms of size, weight and £££.
I find it pointless using FF glass on a APS-C body if your looking to save weight etc.
Click to expand...
I thought they'd just released a couple of DX telephotos?
 
snerkler said:
I thought they'd just released a couple of DX telephotos?
Click to expand...

Ahh yes your right. I was thinking more quality glass like their FX gold ring lenses
I think the following lenses were the only ones they made:-

12-24mm f4
17-55mm f2.8
10.5mm f2.8
 
Have just sold my D750 and am left with D7200/D5200/D3100 bodies plus some Canon, Panasonic and Fuji stuff.

I had a bit of a reality check recently and found that I did not use my D750 much so simply let it go.

The remaining kit suits my needs well enough.

Bottom line is that if FX suits your style/subjects/requirements best then it is better to keep your D750. If not, there are some decent DX options nowadays which might suit you better in terms of weight/size/pixel density etc..
 
gary43 said:
Have just sold my D750 and am left with D7200/D5200/D3100 bodies plus some Canon, Panasonic and Fuji stuff.

I had a bit of a reality check recently and found that I did not use my D750 much so simply let it go.

The remaining kit suits my needs well enough.

Bottom line is that if FX suits your style/subjects/requirements best then it is better to keep your D750. If not, there are some decent DX options nowadays which might suit you better in terms of weight/size/pixel density etc..
Click to expand...
Would you mind explaining what you mean about a DX suiting someone better in terms of pixel density please? Unless I'm missing something a DX sensor with the same MP will always have a greater pixel density than a FF leading to more noise and more demands on the lenses leading to softer images.
 
snerkler said:
Would you mind explaining what you mean about a DX suiting someone better in terms of pixel density please? Unless I'm missing something a DX sensor with the same MP will always have a greater pixel density than a FF leading to more noise and more demands on the lenses leading to softer images.
Click to expand...

OK, I will bite..

I am not always convinced about this argument that bigger pixels make bigger photon buckets. I suspect, but do not know for certain, that sensor design has evolved over the years to negate this argument to some extent.

I am also not saying that the high iso S:N is not fantastic on the D750 by the way. At high iso it is probably about 1,5 stops better than the D7200, IMVHO.

Anyway, the point I was making is that for a 24 MP FF sensor versus a 24MP DX sensor you get more pixels per pigeon for the same focal length lens, so have more cropability. I am usually focal length limited when shooting wildlife so the crop factor is a major plus for me. I uesed to own D800 and D810 bodies as well when shooting weddings so do appreciate the abilities of FX bodies.

I shoot for fun when I can nowadays and do not shoot much over iso 800 so do not worry too much about the noise in my D7200 images.
 
Last edited:
gary43 said:
OK, I will bite..
Click to expand...
I don't understand this, it was a genuine question :(

I am not always convinced about this argument that bigger pixels make bigger photon buckets. I suspect, but do not know for certain, that sensor design has evolved over the years to negate this argument to some extent.
Click to expand...
But as new tech comes along it comes along for both FF and DX so I would have thought FX will always have an advantage, at least until some ground breaking new sensor design comes along?

Anyway, the point I was making is that for a 24 MP FF sensor versus a 24MP DX sensor you get more pixels per pigeon for the same focal length lens, so have more cropability. I am usually focal length limited when shooting wildlife so the crop factor is a major plus for me.
Click to expand...
TBH this was discussed a while ago and I was informed it is a bit of a myth. I didn't believe it as I thought surely the more pixels on a subject the better the quality/sharpness of an image and the more that you can crop it, hence why I ran my own tests (mentioned in my first post). Obviously you feel different and that's fine, it doesn't really matter as long as you get the results you want (y). The main benefit I found when shooting crop body was that you could frame better as the subject is larger in the VF.

I shoot for fun when I can nowadays and do not shoot much over iso 800 so do not worry too much about the noise in my D7200 images.
Click to expand...
.

And that's what it's all about (y)
 
snerkler said:
TBH this was discussed a while ago and I was informed it is a bit of a myth. I didn't believe it as I thought surely the more pixels on a subject the better the quality/sharpness of an image and the more that you can crop it, hence why I ran my own tests (mentioned in my first post). Obviously you feel different and that's fine, it doesn't really matter as long as you get the results you want (y). The main benefit I found when shooting crop body was that you could frame better as the subject is larger in the VF.
Click to expand...

I suspect our experiences differ.

The other advantage of a crop body that I find is more accurate spot metering when the subject is against either bright or dark backgrounds and when it only fills a few percent of the viewfinder,

Anyway, I do miss the D750, it is a truly great camera, but am happy with the D7200 for my current needs.

Happy shooting !

Gary
 
gary43 said:
Have just sold my D750 and am left with D7200/D5200/D3100 bodies plus some Canon, Panasonic and Fuji stuff.

I had a bit of a reality check recently and found that I did not use my D750 much so simply let it go.

The remaining kit suits my needs well enough.

Bottom line is that if FX suits your style/subjects/requirements best then it is better to keep your D750. If not, there are some decent DX options nowadays which might suit you better in terms of weight/size/pixel density etc..
Click to expand...

That's just it, I rarely use mine and if/when I do the images are only posted on fb and Flickr for my own gratitude.i honestly don't want to spend anymore on photography at present and for what i can get for my d750 and afew lenses I can replace with a dx camera and cover the focal ranges I need with good glass.
 
Thats my sock said:
That's just it, I rarely use mine and if/when I do the images are only posted on fb and Flickr for my own gratitude.i honestly don't want to spend anymore on photography at present and for what i can get for my d750 and afew lenses I can replace with a dx camera and cover the focal ranges I need with good glass.
Click to expand...
What lenses do you currently have and what do you want? Good glass certainly could help (y)
 
Ive had a D750 and currently got a D500.. My take on this I prefer the D500 in ever ways.. The files are easier to work with the noise is on par to D750 IMO but better at cleaning as they are grain rather than colour speckles

In all honesty the D500 with the correct lens imo you get the best of everything
 
snerkler said:
What lenses do you currently have and what do you want? Good glass certainly could help (y)
Click to expand...

That's just it, to get up to par I.e pairing the d750 off with equally good glass I'd need to spend a few quid and that's what I don't want as I'd rather spend it on my family,I only bought the 750 as I had some cash burning a hole in my pocket, I was more than happy with the quality of the images I took with a d7000 tokina 11-16 and sigma 17-70.
 
Thats my sock said:
That's just it, to get up to par I.e pairing the d750 off with equally good glass I'd need to spend a few quid and that's what I don't want as I'd rather spend it on my family,I only bought the 750 as I had some cash burning a hole in my pocket, I was more than happy with the quality of the images I took with a d7000 tokina 11-16 and sigma 17-70.
Click to expand...
Perfectly good equipment (y)
 
rookies said:
Ive had a D750 and currently got a D500.. My take on this I prefer the D500 in ever ways.. The files are easier to work with the noise is on par to D750 IMO but better at cleaning as they are grain rather than colour speckles

In all honesty the D500 with the correct lens imo you get the best of everything
Click to expand...
For you ;) :p
 
rookies said:
Need to give it a go ;)
Click to expand...
Yep would love to, are you going to loan me yours ;) But that wasn't my point, what's right for you isn't right for everyone (y)
 
snerkler said:
Yep would love to, are you going to loan me yours ;) But that wasn't my point, what's right for you isn't right for everyone (y)
Click to expand...

Know what you mean pal... You never know you may agree ;)
 
rookies said:
Know what you mean pal... You never know you may agree ;)
Click to expand...
I'm happy with what I have. High ISO/low noise capability is a key factor for me (y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top