p.2 #1 · and now something completely different...
The advantage of the DX "reach" or the HSC of any of the bodies is only there when shooting raw files. Otherwise it is identical to simply shooting with a FF body and croping the shot. With raw however it gives you a large savings of space on the hard drive. With jpg's it is such a small difference that while there, hardly worth the bother. Of course there is also the speedup of the write times and the faster fps.
Remember that the perspective you get in the final shot ... or the print does NOT change with the change of focal length. Perspective is only a function of distance to subject. So the 12 megapixels of the D300 at say 200 feet with a 200mm lens gives you exactly the same look as a D3 at 200 feet with a 200 lens. The only change is that you have to crop the shot for the same framing and thus you have fewer pixels left. But whether you do that in camera with HSC or afterwards in photoshop makes absolutely no difference. I think that some folks tend to forget all of that when thinking they get extra reach. Its not really reach ... its megapixels you get since you can be further back and not have to crop away those little dots that make the image.
p.2 #2 · and now something completely different...
Pavel wrote:
The advantage of the DX "reach" or the HSC of any of the bodies is only there when shooting raw files. Otherwise it is identical to simply shooting with a FF body and croping the shot. With raw however it gives you a large savings of space on the hard drive. With jpg's it is such a small difference that while there, hardly worth the bother. Of course there is also the speedup of the write times and the faster fps.
Remember that the perspective you get in the final shot ... or the print does NOT change with the change of focal length. Perspective is only a function of distance to subject. So the 12 megapixels of the D300 at say 200 feet with a 200mm lens gives you exactly the same look as a D3 at 200 feet with a 200 lens. The only change is that you have to crop the shot for the same framing and thus you have fewer pixels left. But whether you do that in camera with HSC or afterwards in photoshop makes absolutely no difference. I think that some folks tend to forget all of that when thinking they get extra reach. Its not really reach ... its megapixels you get since you can be further back and not have to crop away those little dots that make the image. ...Show more →
Well said!
Sep 27, 2007 at 02:14 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · and now something completely different...
At the end of the day it is not the focal length but the FOV that people see in the print.
FX + 200mm FOV = DX + 300mm FOV
Yes, you can do the same thing by croping, but that changes resolution.
FX @ 12MP = DX @ 12MP for a given FOV with regards to resolution.
So the DX crop of an FX sensor looses resolution relative to the DX sensor. In this way, for a given MP size, DX sensors have "more reach".
The same arguments carry over to medium and large format. The advantage of going to a larger format is:
-- more resolution if you keep the pixel pitch the same
-- better high-ISO performance if you keep the MP the same.
