At this point I knew the lowest Aperture Number = more blur in the background. Then when shooting the lens, I discovered at the long end, with a maximum aperture of, f/5.6 hardly any light was being let through...
I then went onto selling this lens and needed a constant f2.8... Could not afford any Nikon offering, so I opted for Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8... HATED the sound of the AF-Motor and paid an extra £100 to get the Sigma equivalent which had a more pleasing AF Sound... however, occassionally I'd have issues where the camera wouldn't fire, and then I would have to turn off and on the camera... no big problem, but something that obviously shouldn't occur and had never happened with any other lens, and to this day, it has never happened with any other lens other than my Sigma 17-50mm...
I then opted for Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 Macro, and I just found all the images incredibly soft around the edges of the subject when shooting at f/2.8. With it also not being the most ideal focal range on a DX Body, I ended up selling the Sigma 70-200mm and opted for a Nikon 105mm f/2.8 Micro...
With this Macro lens I then discovered focal distance greatly affects DOF as well as a wide open Aperture.
I then upgraded my 17-50mm Sigma to a 24-70mm Nikon f/2.8. Then snowballed onto a Nikon 14-24mm and 70-200mm f/2.8...
Now I own all the lenses I would like, exc. 85mm f/1.4 which is not a neccessity for me considering I own the 70-200mm f/2.8. Each lens that I purchased has it's purpose... and it's not neccessarily for Zoom range, but more for Perspective.
I will soon be writing up a full BLOG on my perception and preference of Lens Perspectives...
However this BLOG is more to do with my lens choices and why I opted for FX over DX...
I began shooting DX last year March/April with a borrowed Nikon D90. I borrowed it from my uncle as he suspected I would grow bored of Photography and it was his way of making sure that if I do purchase a DSLR, I definitely know I want one... Heartbroken that I had to give back the D90, I ended up buying a D7000 body only... Chosen as it had gotten a lot of press as the D90 successor, and ISO performance out classing the more Professional choice that is the D300s...
With no lens I chose the 50mm first as I just saw a low f-number meaning very shallow DOF. That's as far as I thought in regards to my choice...
As described above, I went through a few lenses... and looking at my collection of lenses I owned, all the lenses that I bought and kept were Nikon FX lenses. Any lenses sold or exchanged were either 3rd Party Makes or DX...
As these were FX lenses, shooting on a D7000, I always envisioned I'm losing the edges of an image... and that due to the crop, there's aspects of the image that I'm losing out on...
One of my previous BLOG's explains why I suddenly bought a D800 out of impulse, however the D800 was within my sights before it even got announced.
D700 is the entry level FX Body, and I knew D800 would come as the successor and just assumed it's the newer one to the D700, so it must be better... so I constantly read up on it, rumours and everything... when it got released, I knew I definitely wanted it, but with lack of stock and increasing prices, it proved impossible to get...
Nearly opted for a used D700 to satisfy the FX craving... never did, but as far as I'm concerned, I am happy I did make the leap to FX...
Not only because I jumped to FX, but because I managed to buy the camera I had been perving on for the past few months...
To illustrate a benefit of FX over DX... I have taken some shots for comparison...
First to explain, they say 50mm is equivalent to what our eye sees, and matches our eyes perspective... That's why it's such a popular lens... 50mm is very difficult to use on a DX Body, but not impossible, however to get an equivalent field of view on a DX, you'd have to opt for the 35mm f/1.8 to get the same field of view.
However, as focal length is a factor with Bokeh, at 35mm you lose a little Bokeh.
As illustrated below...
Nikon D800 w/50mm f/1.4 @ f.1.8, ISO1600, 1/60sec
Nikon D7000 w/35mm f/1,8 @ f1.8, ISO1600, 1/60sec
As you can see with the above image from the D800, you get a shallower DOF with the same settings. This is becase of the focal length playing its part in the DOF...
Where you get the same field of view, you do get more Bokeh from the shot on an FX Body...
I will also add that on a DX Body, it seems like you can focus in closer...
Nikon D7000 w/50mm f/1.4 @ f/1.8, ISO1600, 1/60sec (focused as close as possible)
When I only had DX, I always imagined more around this frame, have more Bokeh viewable with the top of the can also...
However, when on FX with 50mm, the closest I managed to focus in and shoot with these settings, the frame looked like the below image
Nikon D800 w/50mm f/1.4 @ f/1.8, ISO1600, 1/60sec (focused as close as possible)
If you crop the D800 image to the same field of view as the D7000, you do get very similar Bokeh, although it does seem as if you can get in a little tighter to the subject on a DX Body, which gives a bit more Bokeh due to Focal Distance...
The last two images I will be comparing were both shot on Nikon D7000 at f/1.8, ISO1600 and 1/60sec... However it was the lens that was changed... Composed to the same frame, when 50mm was mounted I had to move the camera further back.
It seems as if you get a bit more better Bokeh with the 50mm, and a lot more compression. Flicking back and forth between the images, the background on the 50mm shots seems to move closer to the subject compared to the 35mm shot.
Nikon D7000 w/35mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8, ISO1600, 1/60sec
Nikon D7000 w/50mm f/1.4 @ f/1.8, ISO1600, 1/60sec
Obviously with the 50mm, I had to recompose and move back to gain same field of view. In terms of image, I do prefer the 50mm as the DOF is shallower with more compression. The 35mm seems to look more distorted around the top of the can...
However the drawback of using the 50mm is the focal distance where to gain the same field of view as the 35mm, you have to step a fair distance back, which sometimes is not always convenient...
In an ideal world, I would like to keep the 35mm f/1.8 and use on the D7000 as a walk around lens, although since I'm mainly an FX shooter, I can't justify keeping hold of it seeing as the 50mm is f/1.4 and can have the manageable field of view on the FX Body...
With this Field of View, and DOF issue when comparing DX to FX, this is partly one of the reasons why I went FX...
In conclusion, DX has it's benefits as you can focus in tighter, which did give the image that tiny bit more Bokeh... Although the Field of View of an FX Sensor just works out so much better for me.
For what I shoot, FX is definitely better for me... There is definitely a difference with Field of View, Perspective, and Depth of Field.
So to anyone who's considering the jump to FX from a DX (as you can tell I'm a Nikon Shooter by not saying APS-C or anything lol, plus it's easier to type), I would say go for it...
I would also add that you should only really jump to FX from DX if you do have the excess money to spend on it, or if you are earning from your Photography work.
@LeoHoangPhoto
No comments:
Post a Comment