Better to put more $ in Camera or Lens???

[Dragster3]

@Destin couldn't agree more...DX glass better bang for the buck.

Sent from my RS988 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Braineack]

I wouldn't buy the D7500 over a D7200 -- they didn't improve it; they made it worse.


DX glass is junk designed for junk cameras.

 

[Derrel]

Despite what many people seem to indicate here, with a 70–200 MM lens, indoors full frame is much better than DX crop. In a lot of situations the full frame makes better use of the 70–200 MM lens then does DX. Not every shot is a bird shot. Not every shot is across a soccer pitch. When it comes time to use the lens indoors a 70–200 simply works better on a full frame camera than it does on the crop body. Same goes for your 2535 and 50 MM prime lenses and your 85 MM prime lens, indoors for sports: the simple fact is that many lenses were designed to be used on a 24 x 36 MM picture area not one that's half that size

 

[Destin]

Despite what many people seem to indicate here, with a 70–200 MM lens, indoors full frame is much better than DX crop. In a lot of situations the full frame makes better use of the 70–200 MM lens then does DX. Not every shot is a bird shot. Not every shot is across a soccer pitch. When it comes time to use the lens indoors a 70–200 simply works better on a full frame camera than it does on the crop body. Same goes for your 2535 and 50 MM prime lenses and your 85 MM prime lens, indoors for sports: the simple fact is that many lenses were designed to be used on a 24 x 36 MM picture area not one that's half that size

For basketball I’ll agree. Maybe also for volleyball. For every other sport I’m consistently shooting at 200mm on my D500, including some indoor sports (swimming, wrestling)

 

[Dragster3]

I wouldn't buy the D7500 over a D7200 -- they didn't improve it; they made it worse.


DX glass is junk designed for junk cameras.

That's a harsh statement...I'm sure guys with $40k Hass and Leica cameras think your FX is junk...so I guess it's relative. You find me a relevant 300mm FF video on 3/4 portraits yet?

Sent from my RS988 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Braineack]

I thought you loved blanket statements...

 

[Dragster3]

I thought you loved blanket statements...

U made me laugh

Sent from my RS988 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Braineack]

 

[pixmedic]

I thought you loved blanket statements...

I love blanket statements!
dragon2 (1 of 1) by pixmedic, on Flickr

 

[jaomul]

Despite what many people seem to indicate here, with a 70–200 MM lens, indoors full frame is much better than DX crop. In a lot of situations the full frame makes better use of the 70–200 MM lens then does DX. Not every shot is a bird shot. Not every shot is across a soccer pitch. When it comes time to use the lens indoors a 70–200 simply works better on a full frame camera than it does on the crop body. Same goes for your 2535 and 50 MM prime lenses and your 85 MM prime lens, indoors for sports: the simple fact is that many lenses were designed to be used on a 24 x 36 MM picture area not one that's half that size

I suppose the Fuji 50-140 is equivalent here. Nikon don't really have a similar alternative

 

[pixmedic]

Despite what many people seem to indicate here, with a 70–200 MM lens, indoors full frame is much better than DX crop. In a lot of situations the full frame makes better use of the 70–200 MM lens then does DX. Not every shot is a bird shot. Not every shot is across a soccer pitch. When it comes time to use the lens indoors a 70–200 simply works better on a full frame camera than it does on the crop body. Same goes for your 2535 and 50 MM prime lenses and your 85 MM prime lens, indoors for sports: the simple fact is that many lenses were designed to be used on a 24 x 36 MM picture area not one that's half that size

I suppose the Fuji 50-140 is equivalent here. Nikon don't really have a similar alternative

i believe sigma has a 50-150 f/2.8 DX lens for nikon and canon

 

[Destin]

Despite what many people seem to indicate here, with a 70–200 MM lens, indoors full frame is much better than DX crop. In a lot of situations the full frame makes better use of the 70–200 MM lens then does DX. Not every shot is a bird shot. Not every shot is across a soccer pitch. When it comes time to use the lens indoors a 70–200 simply works better on a full frame camera than it does on the crop body. Same goes for your 2535 and 50 MM prime lenses and your 85 MM prime lens, indoors for sports: the simple fact is that many lenses were designed to be used on a 24 x 36 MM picture area not one that's half that size

I suppose the Fuji 50-140 is equivalent here. Nikon don't really have a similar alternative

i believe sigma has a 50-150 f/2.8 DX lens for nikon and canon

They do but it’s older and doesn’t have he greatest reviews. Very soft wide open at 150 if I remember right.

I know it’s a different range but their 50-100 1.8 looks pretty incredible.

 

[jaomul]

Despite what many people seem to indicate here, with a 70–200 MM lens, indoors full frame is much better than DX crop. In a lot of situations the full frame makes better use of the 70–200 MM lens then does DX. Not every shot is a bird shot. Not every shot is across a soccer pitch. When it comes time to use the lens indoors a 70–200 simply works better on a full frame camera than it does on the crop body. Same goes for your 2535 and 50 MM prime lenses and your 85 MM prime lens, indoors for sports: the simple fact is that many lenses were designed to be used on a 24 x 36 MM picture area not one that's half that size

I suppose the Fuji 50-140 is equivalent here. Nikon don't really have a similar alternative

i believe sigma has a 50-150 f/2.8 DX lens for nikon and canon

They had a few. They are all discontinued now. The OS version was supposed to be superb, with most reviewers commenting it's only real flaw was it was as big as a 70-200 f2.8