End of DX

ShinySideUp

ShinySideUp

Messages
4,350
Name
Martin
Edit My Images
Yes
We now have the Nikon D610 and D750, the latter being perhaps a 'pro-sumer' camera. Obviously full-frame digital cameras are getting affordable so does that spell the end, sooner rather than later, of the APS-C format and what does that mean for the many folks who have a heavy investment in DX lenses?

Perhaps I am being smug but I have never bought a DX lens as 'as sure as eggs are eggs', larger sensors were bound to become cheaper over time and now I'm very glad I invested in FX lenses.
 
Yes and no maybe in the DSLR,but i still think their life yet in DX and Mirrorless system for a smaller sensor :)
 
Nikon have certainly been putting lots more effort into FX cameras, with a huge range available now. However, there are other manufacturers with very different marketing strategies.
 
Phil V said:
Nikon have certainly been putting lots more effort into FX cameras, with a huge range available now. However, there are other manufacturers with very different marketing strategies.
Click to expand...


Yes spot on although I would be very surprised if Nikon don't bring out their answer to the canon 7D mk2
 
Can't see it personally, FX lenses are often far more expensive and not one is going to
shut out the budget end of the market.
Most of my lenses are FX but for my purpose Dx is the format of my choice
 
With the quality of sensors continually improving, fewer people need a larger sensor, or more megapixels.
 
Last edited:
Cost of the body is one thing but how does the cost of dx vs fx lenses stack up? The 1.8 35mm is small light and cheap, how does the equivalent 50mm stack up? Honest question I don't really follow the costs of digital lenses.
 
D3200 £210. D610 £1285.

When you say getting cheaper, there is an awful long way to go before they are on par price wise.
My crystal ball tells me DSLR is a dead format in the future as mirrorless have so many potential advantages. Silent, less moving parts, smaller, faster, these will all improve overtime.
 
ianp5a said:
With the quality of sensors continually improving, fewer people need a larger sensor, or more megapixels.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and not everyone wants/needs FF

I went from a D300 to a D700 earlier in the year, only to find that i didn't really need the advantages that FF gave me, and to some extent restricted me (particularly in the telephoto reach department), so a couple of month back i "downgraded" back to DX with a D7100, and to my amazement found very little difference quality wise with my shots, plus i had clawed back the reach at the long end

So in short no, i think DX will live long and prosper

large.jpg
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
Nikon have certainly been putting lots more effort into FX cameras.
Click to expand...

I can remember a few years back when a Nikon representative opening a new photographic shop near me stated that Nikon had no plans to produce a full frame camera as they didn't see a need!


Steve.
 
Hope not,FF offers me no advantage in fact the opposite
 
Not a chance, as above, you say affordable... personally to anyone that doesn't do it as a job or have a decent spare income over 1k for a body is not affordable, cheap entry £200 jobs will always be around and always sell because that is affordable.
 
Both formats are here to stay, they both have fundamental advantages and disadvantages. APS-C will always be cheaper/smaller/lighter, FF will always offer better image quality. I don't know actual numbers but I would guess APS-C outsells FF by about 10:1. If Canikon stopped making APS-C camera now they'd go bust before Xmas. On here, we are not representative of the general camera buying public.
 
I welcome the idea of more affordable full-frame cameras for better ability to use shallow depth of field and lower high ISO noise. Other than that I'm not fussed.
 
pjm1 said:
Until one of the great names in cameras, Pentax, starts making a FF DSLR there will always be room for APS-C ;)
Click to expand...

645D isn't that much bigger (sensor size and MP count) than the D8*0 (44mmx33mm and "approx. 40MP" [can't they count them?]).
 
Nod said:
645D isn't that much bigger (sensor size and MP count) than the D8*0 (44mmx33mm and "approx. 40MP" [can't they count them?]).
Click to expand...

Well there is the new Pentax 645Z which bumps it up to 50 MP with a new CMOS sensor, and also now features live view, video, updated AF, much larger ISO range etc (essentially a bigger brother of the "normal" Pentax DSLR's); I would call the MP count quite a bit bigger than the D8*0 now!
 
HoppyUK hit the nail on the head for me - its the sales of lower end DX models that keep Nikon etc. afloat. For every D750 sold there are many many more D3200 sold. If Nikon and Canon go exclusively full frame they will go out of business very quickly as the consumer masses switch to Sony, Fuji etc
 
Nod said:
645D isn't that much bigger (sensor size and MP count) than the D8*0 (44mmx33mm and "approx. 40MP" [can't they count them?]).
Click to expand...
They should really class them as Crop MF, as the sensor isnt 60 x 45mm
 
Or rename it the 4433. I'm sure they're fine cameras (and could be tempted) but they're not (as you point out) full frame MF! (Then again, according to Wiki, the actual frame size of a 645 image is 56mm x 41.5mm.)
 
The only way DX will go away is because Nikon chose to go FX only. Or that they can't source the DX sensors. ;)

Nikon's push towards FX is because there is more profit in FX cameras, and they see it as a sector for growth in a contracting camera market. And they probably believe that any up-graders from DX, or another brand, will start buying new lenses for their new format, so their is more money to be had from the new FX users which there may not be from new DX users, or at least not to the same extent.

They run the risk of alienating their DX users who don't want to go the FX route, but want options for lenses optimised for their system, and/or an upgrade path to the top of a DX range with 'Pro' features. But the vast majority of Nikon users are DX users of their D3*** and D5*** range who may be happy with their camera and the 1-3 lenses.

And we are getting to a point where a lot of people, especially in the mid to lower range, have a good enough system for whatever they want to do, and so a slow down in growth is inevitable. For most people, they have enough pixels, so selling cameras by the number of pixels is becoming less important. Canon seem to have decided to have their APS-C cameras stay in 18Mp, and sell the cameras on other features. The 7DII could be the start of a change to that, time will tell, but it is not the huge jumps from 18 > 20Mp. Not like Nikon who went from 12 > 16 > 24Mp increases over the few years.

Obviously DX is only the Nikon name for their version of the APS-C size of sensor, and they are not the only company using that size of sensor. Everyone who sells DSLRs have a crop sensor format, and is normally where most, or all, of their money comes from for their DSLRs. Whilst many CSC cameras started with the M43 sensor, there are some using the APS-C size sensors, which will extend the the life of the format probably indefinitely.

For me, the DX format is the perfect sensor size, and long may it stick around. :)
 
Regarding mirrorless, the APS-C or m43 diagonal size may live on, but it's possible that the sensor size ratio may change to a circular format. So, for example if your picture crop suits a different ratio, you get more pixels than APS-C height. You could even take portrait format shots without turning the camera on it's side.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
Regarding mirrorless, the APS-C or m43 diagonal size may live on, but it's possible that the sensor size ratio may change to a circular format. So, for example if your picture crop suits a different ratio, you get more pixels than APS-C height. You could even take portrait format shots without turning the camera on it's side.
Click to expand...

Round it goes back to 1:1 'blad will be round to tell you why they were right all along.
 
As has already been said, crop sensors outsell full frame by a considerable margin and that's not going to change significantly any time soon.

So is DX going to disappear?

Not a chance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top