With the introduction of Canon 5D, Nikon D3 and now D700, the interest in full-frame DSLR among photography enthusiasts is growing. D700 offers Nikon users a welcomed full-frame alternative to the D3 at a lower price.
But is full-frame DSLR just hype? Is it for everyone? Full-frame may offer various advantages, but it comes with a price too. Read on and decide for yourself if this camera is for you.
1
Say Goodbye to your DX Lenses
If you already have a collection of DX lenses, you can start selling them off. DX lenses are made for DSLR with smaller sensors. While D700 allows you to still use them, but it crops your photo down to 5-megapixel, which is rather pointless.
0
2
Full-frame Lenses are Heavier
Because of the need to serve a bigger sensor, full-frame lenses are generally much heavier than their DX counterparts. Take for example the
AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED on cropped sensors vs.
AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED on full-frames. The same focal lengths, but 60% heavier. Be prepared to lug around heavy lenses such as this and the 80-200mm.
3
Vignetting
Maybe you are already lugging heavy lenses with your non full-frame camera like myself, so weight is not an issue. But don't forget about vignetting, the darkening of your photo's edges due to your new full-frame camera making use of the whole lens instead of only the center sweet-spot portion of it. Although easily correctable in most photo software, it can become a hassle which you may never have had before.
4
95% Viewfinder Coverage
That means when you look through the D700's viewfinder, you see only 95% of what is going to be captured. Compared to D300's 100%, this is a downgrade! But of course, full-frame cameras give you a larger viewfinder so overall the viewfinder is better.
5
Double the Price of D300
At almost double the price of D300, it becomes hard to justify the additional cost for just a little extras. If you have lots of dough to spare or you really want full-frame, go for it. Otherwise, spending the rest of the money on a good lens will probably yield better results.
Hmmm. A D300 user poking at an FX D700? Shocking! If you want long lenses, go for the smaller DX. If you want ultra-wide, get FX. But don’t pooh pooh FX simply because that’s not what YOU bought. :o)
That is merely an objection look at the disadvantages of full-frame, most of the points apply to Canon 5D and 1Ds as well.
This blog is all about analyzing the shortcomings of gadgets. We all know the good stuffs, so here is the ugly side.
1) Most DX lenses are inferior in quality (optically) than full-sized glass. Bigger/more elements = more collection of light (which allows for more exposure flexibility and higher image quality).
2) See #1… lenses are the most important part of the equation… don’t cheap out on the glass.
3) Buy proper glass, and this won’t be an issue. Some minor vignetting will occur on ultra-wide glass (14mm and lower, but there are no DX equivalents to this width of glass).
4) 3-5% loss on viewfinder is common (even the Amazing F4 only had 97% coverage) the loss of a couple of MM of coverage is FAR outweighed by a FX viewfinder which is twice (closer to 2.25x)the size AND brightness of the DX - The D300 is also a low eyepoint finder, which forces you to squish your face into the body to view…
5) Currently the D700 is only $2,160 at Ritz when you pay with paypal (its a special, but there are many specials on the 700 from reputable dealers if you do the research) - not nearly twice the price of the 300, and there are MANY more features on the 700.
Frankly, this “booo” is bbbbbssssss…
Maaaan, you know there is such thing in the web like search engine, http://google.com if you don’t, go there to understand why this post is bullshit