DX to FX change not worth the hassle ??

Pistnbroke

After many years and hundreds of weddings photographing on DX ( D7100 and 18-140) I purchased a D810 not because I needed one but because I wanted one.
Bad move...Hassle with CF cards as it will only read Lexar and Sandisk, Hassle with flash as it only works with Nikon and big problems with image quality which does not match the D7100. I think the problem is reduced depth of field which does not cover 4 people standing at 45 deg to you ( ie the service). So we have twice the light sensitivity but need to stop down more ....no progress then.
But it is QUIET and that I like.
Any recomendaations ??

spraynpray

I think the noise isn't a massive problem if you are using flash - I feel that flash is more disruptive to the ceremony so just stay with the D7100 or get a D7200 and carry on. I have DX and FX and think the FX is only clearly better (or has an advantage) in pretty poor light.

Pistnbroke

Noise is a problem if you are standing 10ft from the minister....I dont use flash in the service as I have been known to take 150 in the service ..many of the congregation ....so you are saying I wasted my money which is the conclusion I am comming to ....

heartyfisher

I am sort of moving back from my adventure in FX.. I got a d610 and its is a very nice camera, but I have also recently got a D7200 to replace my older D7000 and I am very pleased with that. FX is nice no doubt. The advantages of shallow DOF is clear if you want it. There is also a small advantage in colour depth and DR but the D7200 is just about equivalent. The biggest advantage in IQ is High ISO but then again the D7200 is no slouch.

My D7200 for me is the best Nikon Camera ! (check out the thread about the D7100 being the best camera!) ( I got mine in a sale at the shop ! ) for over $2k less than the D810, and I dunno how much less than the D4s. It performs as well as or better than those flagship cameras, for me. The AF is superb, low light AF is Supurb, the 2x crop kind of makes my 70-200 into another lense.( Though, I love it on the D610 as a real 70-200) I am adding a TC17ii to that 70-200 this week and I am hoping/expecting yet another lense out of it ! Bird photography here I come !!

So if you want absolutely the Best IQ go for a Medium Format Digital.
For people who want the best bunch of use case options I think the DX lineup (especially the D7200 and D5500) is totally a unbeatable price performance choice.

For a dx user I probably wont recommend going FX and spend 5-10 times the money to invest is an FX system unless you can either afford it or you are investing in a photography business.

But I kind of have both (cake and eating it) :-) I use both my D610 and D7200/d7000 with a small set of awesome lenses. great Focal length range and Lense IQ. For almost a quarter the price and weight of an equivalent FX lense and camera system, the DX/FX combo has been a great decision( FOR ME ).

haroldp

I use third party flash and radio triggers routinely on a D810, as well as other brands of flash card.

As I face many types of situations, having a 36mp FX and 16mp DX camera in one body is really useful to me.

... H

heartyfisher

I use third party flash and radio triggers routinely on a D810, as well as other brands of flash card.

As I face many types of situations, having a 36mp FX and 16mp DX camera in one body is really useful to me.

... H

I must say that a D810 is a great DX/FX option. I was totally considering that... but my interest in investigating bird photography tipped the balance ...

tcole1983

Noise is a problem if you are standing 10ft from the minister....I dont use flash in the service as I have been known to take 150 in the service ..many of the congregation ....so you are saying I wasted my money which is the conclusion I am comming to ....

If you are 10 ft from the minister the sound your camera is making probably isn't the most distracting part of you standing 10 ft from the minister...

spraynpray

Yes, 10ft from the minister in these little old English churches isn't unusual at all but I am guessing the dB difference between a D810 and D7200 is less than you think - maybe 2dB. 150 shots during the service? @-) I have known ministers who would chuck you out if you shot more than 20!

WestEndFoto

One under appreciated point is that with high resolution sensors, resolution is lens limited. If you want more resolution, you need to use all of the lens. That means FX, not DX.

Probably does not matter with a 16 megapixel D4, but it is noticeable with a D800 wide open and as sensor resolution increases, it will be noticeable stopped down.

Pistnbroke

Ministers and registrars become click sensitive so if you are trying to do a proper job rather than what the minister says being quiet is important

tcole1983

Yes, 10ft from the minister in these little old English churches isn't unusual at all but I am guessing the dB difference between a D810 and D7200 is less than you think - maybe 2dB. 150 shots during the service? @-) I have known ministers who would chuck you out if you shot more than 20!

I forget the context of where others are from, but still...point stands the same.

pictureted

I think both FX and DX have their place. But for my uses, DX is only better if I need a lot of pixels on a subject and can't readily use a longer lens. The larger number of pixels and dynamic range make the D810 better for most uses.
I initially bought DX for the lower cost and smaller size. The size difference hasn't meant as much as I expected after consideration of lens weight and L-plates, etc.

KnockKnock

D750 might fit your workflow better Comparable body and function of buttons. Dual SD-cards.

Strap the D7200 over one shoulder with your zoom. Strap a D750 over the other with an 85mm prime. FX would give you the artistic look, and give you options, especially if you don't have a 2nd body.

The flash issues should be solvable. I suspect if you stopped down to get the DoF you wanted, bumped the ISO to compensate, you shouldn't end up with a worse image than DX. What you get in addition to equivalent quality in those cases, is the added ability to shoot in darker light and get the shallower DoF.

haroldp

I shoot wildlife and BIF as well as landscapes weddings and kiddies.

Even for wildlife and BIF, I prefer the D810. I have found that my most successful technique for following focus is to use the center focus point on the animals or birds head or eye. While I rarely get larger than a DX (out of an FX frame) size crop out of it, it is usually not centered. A DX camera using this technique would need either shorter lenses resulting in an FT size crop, or would cut off parts of the frame I want.

I like to nail focus spot on, and this approach has yielded by far the largest keeper rate for me.

While I am usually using a 400/2.8 with 2.0 extender (for 800/5.6), It also works with f8 lenses (80-400 with 1.4 extender) which can only use the center focus point.

... H

Ironheart

@pistnbroke it is amazing to me to see the bias here against DX even when you are using it for its intended purpose. If I were shooting weddings professionally I would want the largest DoF I could get away with so as to not ever miss those once in a lifetime moments you are paid to capture. Sure you can lug around FX bodies and worse, FX glass especially zooms, stop down, ISO up, and maybe, just maybe, get a smidgen of extra quality. Or you can toss around your light as a feather DX bodies and svelte glass and automatically get an extra stop of DoF and a few less ibuprofen at the end of the evening. Weddings are not the time to be creative, people will say "oh that would be a lovely picture if only aunt sally weren't so blurry in the background". Besides you have your wife/partner to take all the creative shots. You've got to nail the critical ones. Trade your D8x0s in now for a pile of D7200s. You will be so much happier and your liver will be able to process alcohol rather than NSAIDs :-)

WestEndFoto

I would rather have FX for weddings which are often low light. For the same DOF, less noise, meaning more DOF with same noise. I would probably pick a D810 because it is quiet.

Pistnbroke

Yes Ironheart you have your finger on the pulse of wedding photography..many of your statements are true but the opposite of what many think (not time to be creative etc) But I think I will stick with the D810 ..Its a made your bed lie on it situation...( I carry an 800 with 14mm as well)
Re flash ..my favorite the Meikie 300 will not work neither will the 310 or 320 so I am stuck with the SB400 Yongnous seem to work fine but are too big.

haroldp

I have multiple SB=800's and SB-900's but I am mostly using a Nissin i40. It works flawlessly with nikon ittl, is little bigger than an sb-400 but tilts and swivels and is much more powerful. It is a no brainer for traveling.

Pistnbroke

I have it in my sites..the Meike 310 will work but not on a cable for the flsh flipper ...strange

spraynpray

One under appreciated point is that with high resolution sensors, resolution is lens limited. If you want more resolution, you need to use all of the lens. That means FX, not DX.

Probably does not matter with a 16 megapixel D4, but it is noticeable with a D800 wide open and as sensor resolution increases, it will be noticeable stopped down

I think the under-appreciated point is that FX uses the whole lens where all the distortions are and that DX uses the centre which is the best part.

My own experience (and that of Pistnbroke's not doubt) aligns with Ironheart's views on the subject.

It isn't what the photographer thinks that matters at all, it is what the bride and her mother think that matters entirely. Low light? Yes, there is a difference but the D7100 - and even better the D7200 - is absolutely fine for low light (flash doesn't count as low light of course), but shallow depth of field hiding the guests and venue isn't ever acceptable.

My D750 FX body is used for the few shots of the bride and groom away from the other guests for just a few 'arty-farty' shots, but 97% of the clicks go on the DX. Every time.

retread

I have not shot FX since I gave up film. The more I read the more I am convinced I want to move up to FX and a better DX and shoot both where they fit best. They can still back each other up if need be. Most of my glass is FX anyway.

Snowleopard

I was shooting a fashion show outside, late in the evening and my D700 melted on me 75% of the way through the event, my assistant had a D300s.

She handed me the D300s and I could see a huge difference in image quality in post. It was also irritating dealing with the crop factor because I was positioned where I would be shooting FX.

I made the DX to FX jump from the D70 to the D700 and never looked back. the D300/D300s was not even on the radar because the noise was horrid.

I can't believe that the D7100 is producing photo's with better color, DR, detail than the D810 you don't like.

It is a learning curve.

Ironheart

You're right, the D7100 isn't, but the D7200 is giving the D810 a run for its money. Under real-world scenarios where you would have to crop the pic from the D810 or buy a lens so large you need to mount it on a truck, the D7200 beats the mighty D810 hands down. In other scenarios the D7200 is about a half a stop behind. I'll take that trade-off against the weight and bulk every day of the week. Others have different priorities. I'm just representing MNSHO
The D300 is a 7 year old camera design, and we've come a long way since then, just sayin'

spraynpray

Must get those +1 buttons back on here!

WestEndFoto

One under appreciated point is that with high resolution sensors, resolution is lens limited. If you want more resolution, you need to use all of the lens. That means FX, not DX.

Probably does not matter with a 16 megapixel D4, but it is noticeable with a D800 wide open and as sensor resolution increases, it will be noticeable stopped down

I think the under-appreciated point is that FX uses the whole lens where all the distortions are and that DX uses the centre which is the best part.

My own experience (and that of Pistnbroke's not doubt) aligns with Ironheart's views on the subject.

This isn't an issue with any FX lens that I own the way I shoot them, except the 20mm 2.8 AIS and the 50mm 1.4G.

WestEndFoto

With my 85 1.4G shot wide open (on my D800 but the result would be the same on any 24mp FX camera), shooting in DX means I am downgrading my 20mpish lens to a 10mpish lens. Stopped down this will not be a big issue until sensor resolution improves.