Nikon 17-55 AFS-DX f/2.8 with D700 or D3

Can some one tell ,how the 17-55 AFS-DX will work with FX format. I learned that it will crop the size of the image

proportionatle in the sensor. It will record only to the extend of 5.2 MP or so.My question is if your focal length is 35mm or

more in this 17-55 lens wheather it will rcord the image to the full size of the FX format. ?

After 25mm or so it covers the full frame, but you must remember that the lens was not designed with such a format in it's design, so edges of the frame will not be optimised - may not be noted though unless doing critical landscape photography.

In the automatic crop mode this lens will cover the same angle of view as it would on a DX format. That is the

intention for the cropping mode.

 

The automatic cropping can be switched off and set to manual selection in the D3 and I suppose in the D700 as well.

 

If the 5MP are sufficient for your needs (like viewing on a computer monitor) there is no problem. For large

prints it will be restrictive. Since the image circle is indeed a circle - you gain a bit over DX format if you

want to shoot square images :-)

Frankly, it does not make a lot of sense to use this or any lens DX lens on a <strike>D300/D700</strike> D3/D700 as you loose the FX advantage in doing so.

As a lot of us have been saying over and over, if you get an FX body, you'd better have the right lenses to go along with it. It does not make any sense to spend $2700 on a D700 or $4500 on a D3 (or whatever price changes will be in the longer run) and skim on lenses.

 

The cost for an FX sensor is roughly 10 times as much as a DX one. Therefore, if you use DX crop on FX on any regular basis, you are effectively throwing your money away.

 

It is indeed an alternative to use the 17-55mm/f2.8 AF-S DX on an FX body, well sort of an alternative.

Here is an example using that lens at 28mm, stopped down to f5.6 on the full D3 frame. You can still see some vignetting at 28mm and it is not even wide open. The real problem is that even though the center of the image is fine, of course, but the quality of the edge drops drastically.<div></div>

Pixel-level crops, both are 600 x 600 pixel squares

 

Pay attention to the edge crop. Quality on the right (center) side of the square is still acceptable, but it deteriorates very drastically and merely a few hundred pixels farther, the left (edge) side of the square is horrible. The tree branches become fuzzy and so are the shingles on the roof in the background.

 

Again, you will be using the part of the image circle not intended by Nikon. Therefore, even though some DX lenses can cover the full FX frame in part of the zoom range, the quality is simply not there.

 

In the following thread, you'll find similar samples of using the 12-24mm/f4 DX on the full D3 frame:

http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00QgSE<div></div>

>>>>>Frankly, it does not make a lot of sense to use this or any lens DX lens on a D300/D700 as you loose the FX advantage in doing so.

 

Why not on the D300? or ist that a typo Elliot?

I am sure Elliot meant D3 and D700 instead of the D300, which is DX.

Yeah, after i re-read it he mentions also the "FX advantage" Sorry Elliot

Yes, it was a typo. Thanks for the correction Shun.

Thanks Mr.Shun and Mr.Elliot and Mr.John. I never thought that my 17-55 will become obsolite so fast. US$ 1500/- going to be used only upto D300? Why should Nikon do this. Is there any life for the DX lense beyond D 300? Since 17-35 was not available that time I took this lens. Now it seems I should content with this lens along with my D300.

I am sure there is more life after the D300, the D700 is not a replacement for the D300.

The D700 is significantly more expensive.

 

What is wrong with not having the latest and greatest. I still have my D70 and it does great images as it did from day one. Obviously with any new technology they require new money.

 

The lens is not obselete because it is still current and so is the D300. The 17-55 is still regarded the best lens for that FL on DX format. The D300 is still regarded as the best DX body.

 

I have acquired a Nikon 18-200vr for travel and a Sigma 10-20 which is also a DX lens. I love it. Yeah, I may get a D700 used down the road but that is probably 5years away or more. Let the others pay for it and dump it out when I can fish it out for flea prices. As a result I have cancelled my D2h purchase, so I will just carry on using my 4.5yr old camera.

 

With digital every 3 or 4 years there is a new camera, can you really keep up and is spending money like that really efficient.

 

Well basically, as you said, Nikon could of forgotten FX format and have a D3x in DX mode only, would you feel better then? As a result they lose the advantages the D3 and D700 has brought along? But why are you considering a D700 or a D3 anyway, if you think like that ...

Mr.Ray,

 

Thanks for your eye opening advice. Really it is not necessary that I should have D3 or D700. As you said one can not go on buying new product wasting money. I will think about this only after 4- years from now as you rightly said. There is no end for the new models ... Thanks a lot and I feel much more comfortable .

<p>I always wondered how much better (if any) are the 5,2 MP (larger pixels) of D700 compared to 6 MP pf a APS size 6MP sensor?<br>

Will the 5,2 MP of D700 give me larger pictures and more detail than the 6MP DX sensor ?<br>

Can anybody help me in this issue ?</p>

<p> </p>