Upload & Sell: Off
I know this is kind of a newbie topic that is done to death, but I hope my question and thoughts aren't too hackneyed.
I shoot real estate, and I have a crop body. I have always loved my crop bodies, and when it comes down to it, for better or worse, I am one of those who is more in the camp that the camera has really nothing to do with great imagery. I know it gets a little more complex than that with architecture, as the glass you can utilize with full frame is by all accounts better suited for wide angles.
I have recently had more of a hankering to go full frame considering the price of the D610. I have always known I will make the move one day, but have been putting it off. I kind of convinced myself out of it every time I look at the overall cost, but I do have the funds if push came to shove.
Then, the other night I was on DXO using the compare lens function. I was comparing my current d90 with tokina 11-16 setup, which I love, to the d610 with the tokina 16-28. The results did surprise me. I honestly did not expect the results to be that dramatic, and not sure if I am just totally misunderstanding something, or what. I have always known full frame is more capable in exceeding image quality than a crop body, but those graphs seem to indicate the difference is staggering.
I also read the dxomark score info, and it mentions it tends to favor low light. Since I don't often shoot in low light environments, I wondered how that factored in as well.
So, if you have made it this far, these metrics are really getting me close to pulling the trigger, and I wondered if there is in fact such a leap in quality when you make the jump. I have heard some say it is huge, and others say they didn't even notice. Any thoughts or comments welcome.
I see that I can't attach a photo, so I linked to my dropbox. I hope posting the dxo results is ok here.
D90 11-16 vs D610 16-28 Sharpness