DX lense on the D750

[mark4583]

Im thinking of getting the D750, I have a few DX lense and several FX, would the image quality with the DX on the 750 be Better , worse or about the same as being shot on the D300?

[Manfred M]

The camera is about 3 generations newer than the D300, so it will perform better, regardless of what lenses you put on it. That being said, why one would buy a full-frame camera and use it with crop frame lenses is a bit beyond me. In DX mode, the camera has a resolution of 3,936 x 2,624 pixels (10.3 MP) which is lower than the D300 with 12MP . If all you do is post images on the internet, that is more than enough, but if you plan to print, don't bother and stick with the FX lenses.

[shreds]

Mark,

The D750 is a much more recent addition to the Nikon stable than the now aged D300. However, as ever, its hugely about the quality of the glass on the front of the camera. Your lenses should be fine on the D750. I have used DX lenses on a single digit Nikon for a number of years and this allowed me to move up to top class FX lenses over a period of time.

The sensor on the D750 is more recent and advanced than the legacy D300 so do not worry. Ultimately it is all about you and the few inches behind the viewfinder, so concentrate on that, rather than the kit. The D750 is used by many Pros I know and that is a good indicator of its versatility and quality.

You will notice a difference compared to the D300 but just take it in your stride and adapt to the quality rather than trying to do it all in one step.

[mark4583]

Yeah im just kinda stuck at a crossroad if I want to continue on with DX or FX, the D500 is stretching my budget more than I want to spend on a new Body so I think in between the D750 or the D7500

[george013]

Yeah im just kinda stuck at a crossroad if I want to continue on with DX or FX, the D500 is stretching my budget more than I want to spend on a new Body so I think in between the D750 or the D7500

The main difference is the aov between them. If you shoot often with a wide aov and/or a close distance than ff might be the choice. Also when you want to print BIG sizes.
A second hand D700 isn't that expensive any more. Still a wonderful camera.

George

[William W]

Yeah im just kinda stuck at a crossroad if I want to continue on with DX or FX, the D500 is stretching my budget more than I want to spend on a new Body so I think in between the D750 or the D7500

The main difference is the aov between them. If you shoot often with a wide aov and/or a close distance than ff might be the choice. Also when you want to print BIG sizes.

I don't look at things the same way.

I have at present: 5x4; 6x7; 645; 135; and APS-C Format Cameras.
I have never thought of the main difference being aov (Angle of View).

The main ‘differences’, for me are:
1. > the regular capacity attain shallow DoF (Depth of Field)
2. > the range of fast (meaning very large aperture) UW/A (Ultra Wide Angle) and W/A Lenses
3. > the ability to utilize the full capacity of T/S Lenses
4. > the above three contained within a relatively small physical size; portability; and hand holding capacity of the Camera

Within those four main criteria, my opinion is that 135 Format wins.

135 Format is “FX” or “35mm Format” or "Full Frame"

***

To the OP question of using a DX lens on an FX camera - I don't see much point in that exercise.

WW

[george013]

I don't look at things the same way.

I have at present: 5x4; 6x7; 645; 135; and APS-C Format Cameras.
I have never thought of the main difference being aov (Angle of View).

The main ‘differences’, for me are:
1. > the regular capacity attain shallow DoF (Depth of Field)
2. > the range of fast (meaning very large aperture) UW/A (Ultra Wide Angle) and W/A Lenses
3. > the ability to utilize the full capacity of T/S Lenses
4. > the above three contained within a relatively small physical size; portability; and hand holding capacity of the Camera

Within those four main criteria, my opinion is that 135 Format wins.

135 Format is “FX” or “35mm Format” or "Full Frame"

***

To the OP question of using a DX lens on an FX camera - I don't see much point in that exercise.

WW

I don't see any point in buying a ff and use dx lensen either. A waist of money. If you want to switch to ff start buying ff lenses and use them on dx. Then you use the better part of the image circle. And if movies are no issue look for a second hand D700. I own both and still think the pictures from the D700 are better. Maybe due to different setting and a different converter, I don't know.

George

[xpatUSA]

Of course my Sigma DSLR experience is largely irrelevant to most of us, but here it is anyway folks:

Sigma started out with 1.7 crop DSLRs which is what I have ... "worse" even than Canon's 1.6 and way worse than Nikon's 1.5.

Still, Sigma makes their DC lens with an APS-C image circle which "wastes light" on my 1.7 croppers; BUT if you want true macro (1:1) then you only get Sigma DG lenses with their 135 image circle. None of which bothers me very much and - like William - when I attach the 17-50mm APS-C zoom to my 1.7 crop DSLR, I get what I get.

It got to be fun on the DPR forum when Sigma brought out their so-called "APS-H" model (which, like the Canon, was nowhere near APS dimensions). Not only were there countless threads about "will APS-C lenses vignette" (usually headed by a general question with a kajillion different answers) but then Sigma carefully confused the issue by saying older lenses (non-"Global") wouldn't AF properly - even when some of them would! Sigma ... Consistency 'R' Us.

Now Sigma are threatening us with a 135 format 'L' mount camera in 2019 ... I will not be on board for that little joy.

Still, I can see one point to using my existing APS-C lenses - simply not to have to follow the herd with it's usual effect on one's wallet.