Nikon DX vs Full Frame 70-300mm

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 11:51:17 -0700, Richard Palush wrote:

Quick question on quality or sharpness when using the 70-300mm VR.
Is there a difference using this lens on the D700 vs D90. I know initally
the D90 Crops and the image looks closer - but when cropping with the
D700 do you get the same result? I thought I read after cropping the
image is same.
Any thoughts from you guys?

No. What's the same is the image presented by the 70-300mm lens
to the same areas of the two sensors. Although the D90's image will
be approximately what you'd see from the cropped area of the D700,
the D90 would give you the full 12mp resolution vs. about 5mp from
the cropped D700, so the D90's images would have more detail.


I plan on using the D700 with the 24-70 and the D90 with the 70-300 VR -
this should cover most of what I need, I either shoot wide or all out, so
missing 70 to 100 shouldn't cause any problems.

No, it shouldn't. The relative focal length gap from 70 to 105mm
is only 50%. When photographers didn't have the luxury of decent
zoom lenses, they'd often carry several fixed focal length lenses.
If one was the standard 50mm lens, they might also pack an 85mm or
105mm lens. The relative focal length gaps from 50 to 85 or 105mm
wasn't really considered excessive, yet they're considerably more
(at 70% and 110%) than your 50% gap. In the unlikely event that
you'd absolutely *need* to use a focal length in the missing 70 to
105mm range, you'd only have to overcome the fear of dust and put
the 24-70mm lens on your D90.


[from your next message:]
Where if any is there an advantage to use the 70-300 on the D90 or the D700.

Use the D90 to get greater resolution from the 70-300mm lens and
use it at reduced resolution on the D700 in very low light to take
advantage of its slightly better high ISO performance. Maybe your
next acquisition should be Nikon's 85mm f/1.4 lens, but then you
might also want to get another body for it.