Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


full frame vs crop - lens choice


Meditator 5 2 1 United Kingdom
4 Jan 2013 8:48AM
Wondering whether anyone can help. I am considering moving from my D90 to D600. Will the various lens that I have bought for the D90 work to best effect on D600 or do I need to consider replacing all the lens'?

All advice welcome

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

JohnParminter 7 1.2k 14 England
4 Jan 2013 9:23AM
It will depend on the lenses you already have Meditator, list them and I'm sure you will get knowledgeable replies.
JackAllTog e2
5 3.7k 58 United Kingdom
4 Jan 2013 9:25AM
Depends a bit on the lenses, what lenses do you have?
Edit: ooops late Wink
thewilliam 6 4.7k
4 Jan 2013 10:06AM
As John has said, many lenses are DX only and they'll cause the D600 to use only half its frame area when it auto-crops. It's worth totting up the cost of upgrading all your lenses to FX versions because you may well have a shock. Buying the D600 might be the cheap move.

To do the same job, an FX lens needs to be 1.5 times the focal length of a DX.
NEWDIGIT 3 401 United Kingdom
4 Jan 2013 11:06AM
Are you aware that there have been several mentions regards dust problems with the D600.
Might be prudent to wait awhile to see if there are any more issues or Nikon rectify the current problems.
If you still intend going full frame then it makes sense to consider upgrade of glass to make best possible use of the new body.
I have exactly that problem as I was using a D3100, and D7000 then last year given a D800e as a retirement gift.
Very nice I here you say but now Im stuck as its difficult to justify the cost, on a pension, of upgradeing my current glass to get best use from the D800e.
Seriously considering selling the D800e to fund good glass and stick with the D7000 as it does everything I want it to do and then some
4 Jan 2013 7:45PM
It is part history now but one reason Nikon took a while to go FX digital is many older film era lenses emit light at a low angle in the frame corners onto a sensor. Although technology has improved sensors still do not handle light at a low angle very well.
Most recent lens introductions have a telecentric design to work better on digital cameras.
Nikon initially avoided digital lens problems by sticking with crop sensors and bringing out a range of telecentric DX lenses
One of an FX upgrade costs is that some older relatively inexpensive second hand lenses do not perform well in FX frame corners, particularly wide open.
Any DX lenses works normally as a DX lens on the D600; with probably similar or slightly better image quality than on your D90.
The D7000 has much more resolution, better high noise performance, better autofocus and better dynamic range than your D90 for around 630 new.
The D600 with FX lenses is even better, but including FX lenses in the budget can cost a lot more money.
annettep38 e2
3 188 32 France
4 Jan 2013 11:03PM
Not sure about the corner sharpness comments. My 70-300 VR was useless on FX but the 80-200 2.8 which is ten years older is fine.
All tele primes are fine on the FX format. Also all the 50mm standard lenses.
even the dx 12-24 works on Fx down to 15mm.
5 Jan 2013 8:02AM

Quote:Not sure about the corner sharpness comments. My 70-300 VR was useless on FX but the 80-200 2.8 which is ten years older is fine.


It is often important to consider lens complexity and price point as part of a likely lens performance equation.
At the Nikon link I posted you can check out likely lens results for current lenses before parting with any money Smile
As a rule of thumb old f2 .8 wide-angle primes (from any manufacturer) are appalling compared to a good modern 70-300.
As a second rule of thumb across all photographers more photographers use relatively wide angles than use 300 mm or longer, and as a third rule of thumb wide angle optical performance is not as good as longer focal lengths.
The VR version of the 70-300 is surprisingly good for a 4x and relatively affordable zoom at f5.6, just as an 80-200 f2.8 is relatively good but some way from outstanding at f2.8. The lower price 70-300 versions are some way from good.
Maybe a point you are making is photography is quite expensive in the sense an f2.8 lens is not necessary brilliant wide open but is generally much better than an f5 .6 lens by f5.6 f2.8 lenses cost more than f5.6 alternatives Sad
300mm and longer primes are excellent wide open, and much better than a 70-200 or an older 80-200 f2.8 when used wide open.
Meditator 5 2 1 United Kingdom
5 Jan 2013 6:44PM
Many many thanks to all who have taken the time to write with such helpful and interesting comments.

After some additional research elsewhere and with the advice above my budget will not stretch to upgrading my various lens' - some will clearly work with D600 others will not.

I think the D7000 (which I had been seriously considering) will suit my pocket and abilities at an appropriate level. I may try to select glass with a view to going full frame at a later date.

Phil

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.