Any "FX" Shooters out there ?

Discussion in 'Photo Hut' started by noeettica, Aug 18, 2013.

  1. noeettica

    noeettica Well-Known Member

    If you have to ask you wouldn't understand LOL

    You think its worth it ?
     
  2. menzor29

    menzor29 Well-Known Member

    66
    0
    81
    my buddy shoots with a d600 and d4 they are great cameras but when looking at the photos he takes vs the photos i take using my d3200 or my trusted old d700 the definition is comparable, not saying they match but to the lamen it would hard to to say which is which. the camera is only as good as the glass in front of it if your using kit lens with fx camera your still not getting the full potential of the camera. he shoots freelance for Gainesville sun and the alligator, mostly sports and his D4 is just a mega machine when it comes to sports shots. you should check out some of his work http://www.brettleblanc.com. most of his shots were using the D4 on there.
     

  3. noeettica

    noeettica Well-Known Member

    I tend to agree I tested a D3100 and the shots are razor sharp , and after shooting with a D600 I really can't see the $$$ just for the FX .

    a funny thing and it is NOT funny at all :-( when you shoot DX with DX Glass on the D600 it beats any Fx glass under 1K !!! IMHO


     
  4. menzor29

    menzor29 Well-Known Member

    66
    0
    81
    I mostly shoot with a af-s nikkor 17-35mm f2.8d fx lens, its a $1700 piece of glass but well worth it. stick that that on my d3200 or d700 and damn fine pics, just an all around great lens considering the types of photos i take. I have a couple others but its the go to. Now if you were to put a lens like this  Nikon 200mm f/2 VRII on a d600 the images would be holy sh$t amazing. Just need to turn a few tricks to afford it. :(
     
  5. noeettica

    noeettica Well-Known Member

    I plan on adapting my 645 Pentax Glass to the D600 body ... I'll see how that goes ...

    You have anyone that can recalibrate a Nikon lens ?

    The "Fast Glass" is Way out of Reach :-(
     
  6. JoseC

    JoseC I Love microskiff.com!

    73
    0
    81
    I shoot with a DX camera now but an FX camera is definitely on my list.

    There is a tremendous difference, but the difference might not be worth it to a photographer that does not use the camera commercially.

    If you cant afford to buy fast glass, an FX isnt for you, because thats what you should be using to get the most out of your FX sensor.  Plus, on an FX camera, defects from cheap glass is much more noticeable.
     
  7. keckers19

    keckers19 Well-Known Member

    96
    0
    81
    Honestly, it all depends on what you will be doing with the camera. I have had both DX and FX, but for what I like to do I have my eyes set on a new DX.
     
  8. keckers19

    keckers19 Well-Known Member

    96
    0
    81
    There's a lot to consider when choosing. There will be some sacrifice with either.
     
  9. noeettica

    noeettica Well-Known Member

    Kind of frustrating that with limited light using an f 1.2 manual focus Nikkor at an ISO of about 1600 shutter speed is around 250-320 or so shooting wide open the images are NOT usable :-( ! this is running on the fX setting ... looking into an eyepiece magnifier ...

    The 3100 I just sold yielded Stunning images and I am pleased the new owner is happy with it ...now if I can just do the same with the FX !!! :eek: