More reach- 1.4 teleconverter or crop body camera?

Peeb · Aug 31, 2016

Shooting a D610, which is a lovely camera. When shooting most things, I love the full frame format; but when shooting wildlife, I miss the 'reach' of crop body cameras.

I was toying with trying out a 1.4 teleconverter to give me the reach of a crop body- but for about the same money, I could buy a refurbished D3200, and I have the 1.5 crop factor plus a backup camera.

Leaning towards the D3200 as the pixel density would be superior to the D610 in dx mode, and the image quality would be superior to the D610 with a TC.

What do you think? Am I missing anything?

robbins.photo · Aug 31, 2016

As long as your telephoto lenses have a built in focus motor that would work fine. Tc's can be a nice addition to fast glass, I use one often with my 70-200 2.8, but not really that great for slower glass. On a 5.6 lens the af gets iffy in anything other than really good lighting.

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk

ruifo · Aug 31, 2016

I agree with the DX camera approach, but I'd look for one of the D7x00 models, instead, even if bought used. The D3x00 series only allow you to change ISO by a full stop, no 1/3 or 1/2 stop change like in your D610. Both the D3x00 and D5x00 families won't autofocus with AF lenses, but only with AF-S lenses, differently of your D610. These are deal breakers for me, hence my recommendation. Not sure if these would be issues for you or not. Good luck.

DarkShadow · Aug 31, 2016

Imo if you want to pick up a crop body I would look for a refurb D3300 over a D3200.Shoots faster,has better IQ,lower noise,larger view finder and No AA filter. IMO its the best entry level Nikon to date and it tracks and focuses wonderful even with so few focus points. I had one it rarely ever had a problem if any locking on accurately with authority. Even did some night photography in low light and never struggled one bit and it produced extremely clean and clear images. Just keep in mind focus points are very small and as the view finder compared to your D610.

goooner · Aug 31, 2016

I've always been intrigued by this. Would it not be better to crop the full frame goodness, than use a smaller sensor? I always thought pixel size is better than pixel density, but I don't know too much about that. Maybe banana breath can weigh in on how his older crop sensors compared to cropped full frame shots :glee:

robbins.photo · Aug 31, 2016

goooner said:
I've always been intrigued by this. Would it not be better to crop the full frame goodness, than use a smaller sensor? I always thought pixel size is better than pixel density, but I don't know too much about that. Maybe banana breath can weigh in on how his older crop sensors compared to cropped full frame shots

This sounds like a job for Banana Breath!

Oh wait.. that's me. Lol. Ok, so on the whole I prefer the shots from my D600. The differences between the two are not huge, by any means. The D7100 did an outstanding job and I was always very happy with the IQ. But there are subtle differences that I do notice with the 600, mostly in the background areas of the shot.

I don't shoot in DX mode, ever. I use FX mode exclusively, if I want to down sample (which I usually do) I do so in post.

I do carry and use a 1.4x TC often - I find the IQ loss negligible on my 70-200 mm Sigma. It makes the sigma a 98-280mm F4 - which as it turns out is a fantastic focal length range for zoo shooting.

If I really need 2.8 I can remove the TC quickly and store it in any pocket, so it gives me a lot of versatility and I don't have to carry two lenses. The "downside" of the TC really for me is that it only works well with that one lens, none of the other telephotos I have are fast enough for the TC to really work that well with. I have a Tamron 70-300mm VC 4.5/5.6, but if I add the TC at it's maximum focal length it goes to F8. Yes, the 600 will focus at F8.. but only with enough light, so the AF becomes a bit iffy.

So in those situations carrying a second crop sensor would probably make more sense. As it is though if I need more reach usually what I'll do is just head back to the car, take a break, swap to a longer lens and then head back.

So really it comes down to what you shoot and shooting style as to which is going to work better for you. Having a second camera/lens on hand can let you get shots that you might otherwise miss because the lens you have on your primary just doesn't have enough reach. For me that isn't really a huge issue, but for others it might be.

tirediron · Aug 31, 2016

There is no 'extra reach' afforded by crop-sensor cameras. There is a smaller field of view which causes the optical illusion whereby because there's less area viewable things appear larger, and the common misconception that the focal-length equivalency multiplier actually changes focal length, but at the end of the day the subject in an image shot at 200mm with a crop-sensor and one shot with the same settings on an FF sensor will be substantially the same.

robbins.photo · Aug 31, 2016

tirediron said:
There is no 'extra reach' afforded by crop-sensor cameras. There is a smaller field of view which causes the optical illusion whereby because there's less area viewable things appear larger, and the common misconception that the focal-length equivalency multiplier actually changes focal length, but at the end of the day the subject in an image shot at 200mm with a crop-sensor and one shot with the same settings on an FF sensor will be substantially the same.

Ok, so quite true. But of course it's the end result that most folks focus on (no pun intended) so thought I'd just stick with that.

Gary A. · Aug 31, 2016

tirediron said:
There is no 'extra reach' afforded by crop-sensor cameras. There is a smaller field of view which causes the optical illusion whereby because there's less area viewable things appear larger, and the common misconception that the focal-length equivalency multiplier actually changes focal length, but at the end of the day the subject in an image shot at 200mm with a crop-sensor and one shot with the same settings on an FF sensor will be substantially the same.

While the size of the subject appearing in a FF sensor is the same as it appears in a cropped sensor, often the crop sensor will have more pixels available for image/subject capture than a FF, hence more detail. In this case a FF D610 has the same pixel density as a cropped D3300, so cropping the D610 to the equilivent frame/size of the D3300 will significantly affect the IQ.

I have no digital Nikon expertise. But in general, I'd go for the second body. I find that in many/most situations, shooting with two cameras is easier, faster and more enjoyable than shooting with one camera. With two cameras you can have a wide angle or macro on the D610 and telephoto on the Dxx00 and now your're ready for a variety of subjects without the hassle of changing lenses.

tirediron · Aug 31, 2016

Gary A. said:
While the size of the subject appearing in a FF sensor is the same as it appears in a cropped sensor, often the crop sensor will have more pixels available for image/subject capture than a FF, hence more detail. In this case a FF D610 has the same pixel density as a cropped D3300, so cropping the D610 to the equilivent frame/size of the D3300 will significantly affect the IQ.

I have no digital Nikon expertise. But in general, I'd go for the second body. I find that in many/most situations, shooting with two cameras is easier, faster and more enjoyable than shooting with one camera. With two cameras you can have a wide angle or macro on the D610 and telephoto on the Dxx00 and now your're ready for a variety of subjects without the hassle of changing lenses.

S'trewth; and yes, there can be an advantage to shooting a crop-sensor in certain situations, not disputing that, just trying to dispel the still persistent myth that you more reach with a crop-sensor. Two bodies is ALWAYS better!

robbins.photo · Aug 31, 2016

tirediron said:
S'trewth; and yes, there can be an advantage to shooting a crop-sensor in certain situations, not disputing that, just trying to dispel the still persistent myth that you more reach with a crop-sensor. Two bodies is ALWAYS better!

Two bodies is always better? Why does that sound like it should start with, Dear Penthouse?

Lol...

Only downside I could see to having two camera bodies would be having to carry two camera bodies, which if your looking at a lightweight lens on at least one wouldn't be a huge deal.

For me probably not the best solution though, since the two lenses I'd want would be the 70-200mm on one and a big heavy telephoto of some sort on the other. Lol.

coastalconn · Aug 31, 2016

If you are focal length limited, a DX body is the way to go. I Would find a nice cheap refurb D7100 if I were you. The buffer kind of sucks, but you can shoot 12 bit lossless which helps. I tested the D500 with my 500 F4 against the D600 with my 500 F4 and 1.4x and the the D500 beat the D600 easily.. If you were to downsample the d7100 to the 10 MP of the d600 in DX mode the d7100 will win again. I am only speaking for Focal length limited wildlife photography...

That's why I went with the 300 F2.8 and D300 instead of a D4. Gives me a really cheap backup and there is no advantage using anything lower than a D5 for me and then for what I shoot, it would be a 6k ?

JoeW · Aug 31, 2016

TiredIron hit the nail directly on the head. It's not that a crop body has more reach (like a longer focal length). It just takes the picture you'd have with a full-frame sensor...and then crops it. So if you have a slow shutter speed or poor light, it's going to be a mediocre picture.

My first advice would be to upgrade your lens, especially for wildlife. You need relatively fast glass since the critters don't hold a pose very long and light is often poor. A teleconverter will extend your focal length but also cut some shutter speed for you and I don't think that's a great way to shoot most wildlife.

Peeb · Aug 31, 2016

JoeW said:
TiredIron hit the nail directly on the head. It's not that a crop body has more reach (like a longer focal length). It just takes the picture you'd have with a full-frame sensor...and then crops it. So if you have a slow shutter speed or poor light, it's going to be a mediocre picture.

My first advice would be to upgrade your lens, especially for wildlife. You need relatively fast glass since the critters don't hold a pose very long and light is often poor. A teleconverter will extend your focal length but also cut some shutter speed for you and I don't think that's a great way to shoot most wildlife.

OP here. Tirediron was correct, but he didn't say anything I didn't already know. DX cameras don't 'crop' anything already captured, they just have smaller sensors and a corresponding narrower FOV. However, they have advantages over FX lenses in DX mode (you're right about how TC lower your lens speed by 1 or 2 f-stops, tho).

A crop body 24MP camera shooting in native DX mode gives you more pixels for additional cropping ability than a 24MP FF camera shooting in DX mode, as you DON'T use 24MP of your FF sensor in crop mode- probably closer to 10 or 12. That's what I was referring to.

coastalconn · Aug 31, 2016

A friend of mine has a D800, D4s and a D500. His lens is the same as mine, the 500 F4 VR-g. Guess which body he always shoots with his 500 lens? That should answer your question..