upgrade d300 to d3x/d700x

In my own pool tests and the ocean images, I simply do not see any loss in image quality, at up to 17x24 prints. If someone were to count lines of resolution, I'm sure it's possible there might be some loss, just it does not appear to be significant in practice, which of course is the main concern.

In my experience, once you stop down to where you would anyway for other reasons, image quality with a good lens +TC is usually outstanding - and that's before you stick a port and a whole bunch of water in the way.

Given that many, many people think the D300 gives the D700 a run for its money underwater ... for a variety of good reasons ... I say get the D700x.

 

A D700x in DX crop mode is almost like a D300 ... 11mp or something.

 

So you have a D700 with 24mp and a D300 in the same camera.

 

If money were no object, personally I'd get a D700x and use the 10-17 in DX mode for wide angle and do macro in FX mode.

But then you lose the DX DOF advantage when shooting macro - decisions, decisions. It would be nice to be able to select DX mode when using a FX lens.

But then you lose the DX DOF advantage when shooting macro - decisions, decisions. It would be nice to be able to select DX mode when using a FX lens.

Just crop after taking the picture. The problem is framing for a DX shooting through an FX viewfinder without marks; are there DX marks on the FX viewfinders?

Just crop after taking the picture. The problem is framing for a DX shooting through an FX viewfinder without marks; are there DX marks on the FX viewfinders?

Depends how you do it; if you just use a DX lens, but don't turn DX lens recognition on in the menus (or you use a non-nikon lens like theTokina) then you simply get vignetting of the periphery. If you turn on DX recognition, then the image is cropped to DX size in the viewfinder.

In my own pool tests and the ocean images, I simply do not see any loss in image quality, at up to 17x24 prints. If someone were to count lines of resolution, I'm sure it's possible there might be some loss, just it does not appear to be significant in practice, which of course is the main concern.

I definitely see degradation in print and on screen. The Kenko DG, Canon EF and Nikon all degrade to image. Is it objectionable? That's subjective. I just see the effects and have to say it's noticeable to me whether on a 8mp or 24 mp camera.

and that is improved perceptable dynamic range within the shadows, this is so clear to me when comparing the low light abilities of the D700 to a D300.

I'm not sure the improvement you are seeing isn't just how bad the dynamic range is on the D300. The higher the ISO generally means lower dynamic range.

I think if one is mostly interested in shooting pretty standard images, both macro and wide angle, stick to DX, if one for some reason feels the need to explore high ISO, frame rates etc underwater, then FX in the form of the D700 does add some possibilities.

+1 vote even I use FF.

Isn't there the Focus Screen E from Nikon with the grid lines? Just draw your own markings for DX on the grid.

Depends how you do it; if you just use a DX lens, but don't turn DX lens recognition on in the menus (or you use a non-nikon lens like theTokina) then you simply get vignetting of the periphery. If you turn on DX recognition, then the image is cropped to DX size in the viewfinder.

Thank you, Jeff!

But, is it possible to turn DX recognition on with a non-DX lens?

Thank you, Jeff!

 

But, is it possible to turn DX recognition on with a non-DX lens?

Yes ... it can be set manually or on "auto" to turn on automatically when a DX lens is attached.

[don't know how my post got oddly duped like that ... ]

Just crop after taking the picture.

But I don't think that will bring back the extra DOF that shooting in DX mode would have

The problem is framing for a DX shooting through an FX viewfinder without marks; are there DX marks on the FX viewfinders?

I hadn't thought of that problem - good point.

But I don't think that will bring back the extra DOF that shooting in DX mode would have

DX crop is simply that - it is a crop. So putting a DX lens on DX camera simply matches the image circle with the sensor, putting a DX lens on FX is mismatching the image circle.

There is no change in DX crop on a FX sensor or a DX sensor, so there is no change in DOF, or in other words, it does "bring back" the "extra DOF"....

Depends how you do it; if you just use a DX lens, but don't turn DX lens recognition on in the menus (or you use a non-nikon lens like theTokina) then you simply get vignetting of the periphery. If you turn on DX recognition, then the image is cropped to DX size in the viewfinder.

The Tokina 10-17 actually fills FF around 15mm.

For details see this thread.

For me, cropping gives me less satisfaction than does just nailing the shot in-camera. So even though I can screw on a Tokina 10-17 and then "just crop," I'm not sure that I would, simply because it is not satisfying. And so, I put on FF 15mm fisheye and my 16-35mm (and struggle with corner sharpness), instead.

We humans are very strange, no?

Some are stranger than others.

DX crop is simply that - it is a crop. So putting a DX lens on DX camera simply matches the image circle with the sensor, putting a DX lens on FX is mismatching the image circle.

 

There is no change in DX crop on a FX sensor or a DX sensor, so there is no change in DOF, or in other words, it does "bring back" the "extra DOF"....

So to put this in simpler English - if I attach a 105mm VR to a FF sensor camera such as a D700, and then manually select DX mode I will get the same larger DOF that I would have got had I attached it to a DX camera such as a D300? Even though the 105 VR is a FF lens?

So to put this in simpler English - if I attach a 105mm VR to a FF sensor camera such as a D700, and then manually select DX mode I will get the same larger DOF that I would have got had I attached it to a DX camera such as a D300? Even though the 105 VR is a FF lens?

Yes - with 5.1MP.

Yes - with 5.1MP.

Beautiful - can't wait for that 24mp Nikon - the best of both worlds with FX for wide angle, and 11-12mp DX for macro DOF when needed and for using with the 10-17 FE until Tokina release a FF version of the 10-17.

For me, cropping gives me less satisfaction than does just nailing the shot in-camera. So even though I can screw on a Tokina 10-17 and then "just crop," I'm not sure that I would, simply because it is not satisfying. And so, I put on FF 15mm fisheye and my 16-35mm (and struggle with corner sharpness), instead.

 

We humans are very strange, no?

I am the same... i don't like to crop, must be the film shooter in me

I am the same... i don't like to crop, must be the film shooter in me

Thought you are still shooting film, no? I actually got used to leaving extra when shooting film for prints and how some magazines would crop things.

For me, cropping gives me less satisfaction than does just nailing the shot in-camera.

 

We humans are very strange, no?

Same here, there is something in nailing the shot (framing, exposure, WB...) and that is one of the things I like about competitions; uwp skills with no PS (which is fine for other things)...

Eric´s post made me think about what we really enjoy about uwp... for example, I like taking the pics but, OTOH, I am very lazy to download and review them and I hate/findtrulyboring treating them in the computer (my very poor knowledge of PS and Capture NX surely helps)... Maybe this should be another topic...