p.3 #1 · Appreciate your advice on selecting lenses for an Africa / Europe trip
DX mode makes sense to me in many more ways than for just using DX glass...
1) It increases the frame rate 4fps to 5fps (matters for wildlife in SA)
2) Increases the number of shots the buffer can hold. You can get roughly >2x number of frames in a burst @ 16MP compared to 36MP. (again matters for wildlife and action)
3) Gives you more creative control at the time of framing, when you know you have to crop it ahead of time (because you do not have reach to start with)
On the side note:
People know it is not "reach" in true sens but it is "crop". DX mode does nothing different than what a DX camera does. Most people who are into photography understand it and the in this context the terms are used interchangeably even by the manufacturers. I notice most of the time the important point gets lost due to these silly arguments. If you want to call it crop yes it is crop. If you want to call it more reach call it that way. Lets not make it big.
p.3 #2 · Appreciate your advice on selecting lenses for an Africa / Europe trip
Craig Gillette wrote:
36 mp gives a tremendous amount of crop/reach. It's never moot. Not for birders, etc. Not for those who can't afford to drop $3000 on a whim to replace a $1500-$1700 camera because it can be cropped. Not for those struggling to pay for something effective beyond 300mm. Certainly not for those who aren't looking for large print sizes.
DX lenses can always be used on Nikon mount bodies. The presence of effective 24 mp dx/aps-c bodies make the idea that dx users will flock to the D800 because it can be cropped automatically silly.
Kindly read what I wrote. It is moot insofar as a 36 MP sensor created an enormously cropable image on its own. There are presently no DX Nikon SLRs with 24MP sensors and until then, the D800 represents added flexibility for birders and those heavily invested in DX lenses.
I guess it is a silly argument since we all agree anyway.
