I don't get it!

[John Bantin 101]

Why do people talk about shooting DX images on an FX camera? Surely, if you use the whole frame, you get the strategy to crop afterwards, which can be very important when you have gutters, stand-firsts, headlines and body copy to consider. Is it to save space on the memory card. If so, why not get a bigger card?

I shot the 60mm macro on FX and gave myself space around my subject.

 

[Alex_Tattersall 90]

I like the 60mm on FX, it’s a whole new playpark

[loftus 42]

Why do people talk about shooting DX images on an FX camera? Surely, if you use the whole frame, you get the strategy to crop afterwards, which can be very important when you have gutters, stand-firsts, headlines and body copy to consider. Is it to save space on the memory card. If so, why not get a bigger card?

I shot the 60mm macro on FX and gave myself space around my subject.

I agree with one small exception - getting a higher frame rate. I like to shoot the D800 using the 1:1.2 crop for topside shooting things like Birds in Flight, Breaching - pushes the D800 from 4fps to 5 or 6.

Edited February 28, 2013 by loftus

[Glasseye Snapper 47]

It could also help for video which doesn't use all pixels anyway. With the crop you still get 1080p but with the extra magnification, assuming that is what you are after.

 

Bart

[TomR1 5]

I don't get it either for underwater still work. The camera crops to the center of the frame (either DX on a FX cameral or 1.3x crop on the new D7100) and I can always do that myself. However, what I can't do underwater is compose as well as I can on my 24" screen at home. Plus, it's a pain to move the focus rectangle around to get a focus on the eye and still get a nice composition. It seems much easier to leave the focus rectangle in the center and fire away, using all those extra pixels to compose on land.

[Larry C 24]

DX lenses.

[Deep6 7]

DX lenses.

Aside from the Tok 10-17, its the lack of DX lenses especially from Nikon. I am using my FX 60 & 105 for U/W.

Bob

[spencerjb22 4]

old habits

[tdpriest 115]

Aside from the Tok 10-17, its the lack of DX lenses especially from Nikon. I am using my FX 60 & 105 for U/W.

Bob

 

Your comment doesn't make sense: why use an FX camera with DX cropping if there aren't DX lenses? Do you mean that there aren't FX wide-angle lenses? I'm using a Sigma 15mm f2.8 and a Nikon 16-35mm f4, along with the workhorse close-up lenses.

[Scuba_SI 39]

Competition entries that prohibit cropping. Had that 'crop up' in our shootout last year.

[johnspierce 25]

Competition entries that prohibit cropping. Had that 'crop up' in our shootout last year.

 

Now isn't that an interesting conundrum. This just shows how silly competition rules are. You can't crop, but the camera can crop if you use the DX setting. If a competition doesn't allow post-production HDR but your camera does it in the chip software will it be allowed? At a certain point, the competitions will all have to realize it's about the final image and not about how you got there. Soon we will have software embedded on a chip which will allow the removal of "distracting" background people/things or whatever in camera to the RAW image. We already have cameras which can modify bokeh, will that be allowed?

 

But anyway, I digress...

 

To John's original post I have to agree with him -- why use DX mode at all even if you are using a DX lens. So it vignettes. Crop it. Seeing a smaller image in your viewfinder in crop mode isn't going to make photography easier.

 

JP

[Deep6 7]

Your comment doesn't make sense: why use an FX camera with DX cropping if there aren't DX lenses? Do you mean that there aren't FX wide-angle lenses? I'm using a Sigma 15mm f2.8 and a Nikon 16-35mm f4, along with the workhorse close-up lenses.

Lack of DX.

[TomR1 5]

Competitions that have rules that prohibit cropping shouldn't be entered.

[E_viking 30]

I would define it as another way of getting as close as possible direct in the Camera.

[davichin 18]

CMAS style splash-in competitions where you cannot crop after the shot, but can take advantage of this "pre-shot-crop" DX shooting... it is like having two macro (or whatever) lenses on the same dive... The funny thing is that some competitions don´t like this and have come up with a new rule that states "all taken pictures must have the same resoultion..." whatever...

[Aussiebyron 57]

I am all for competitions that do not allow cropping. It actually shows the skills of the photographer and their ability to compose and shoot the image and comparing that photographers skills against others doing the same. Its not about someone with a large MP camera that just shoots away and crops the shit out of their image to get something decent in the end I dont see the skill in that.

 

I am also for competitions which all the images are shot in the same location. Everyone in the same boat so to speak. I dont like competitions were one can travel all over the world to prime locations to get that winning shot. Doesnt show skill just the size of their wallet.

 

I think the reason why and I too have asked regarding shooting DX on an FX camera is in reference to lenses and namely the Tokina 10-17mm. I have asked is there any difference between the quality of the images taken with the Tokina 10-17mm @ 10mm in DX mode of the D800 and the quality of the images taken with the Sigma 15mm FE in FX? The answer I get is that who cares about the shooting in Dx as you can shoot the 15mm in Fx mode and crop it.

 

Is there a versatile lens like the Tokina 10-17mm in FX? or the only thing to compare it is the Sigma 15mm FE? If your cropping the Sigma 15mm shots on Fx doesnt that make you loose the feel of a ultra wide (weitwinkel) Fisheye image?

 

Can anyone tell the difference between a Tokian 10-17mm shot at 10mm in Dx mode and a Sigma 15mm shot in FX mode other than the image size? What do the images compare when the FX image is resized to the DX image taken with the Tokina 10-17mm @ 10mm?

 

Regards Mark

[johnspierce 25]

...I am all for competitions that do not allow cropping. It actually shows the skills of the photographer and their ability to compose and shoot the image and comparing that photographers skills against others doing the same.

 

I am also for competitions which all the images are shot in the same location.

 

Regards Mark

 

Mark,

 

I will have to respectively disagree with your statement that cropping shows less skill than not cropping. Back in the early 80's when I first started shooting underwater 99.99% of all underwater photographers used a Nikonos V 35mm film camera. 35mm with extension tube and framer for Macro and 20mm for W/A for the most part with a few variations. My point is that the world was turned on it's head when U/W photography went digital and the image delivered in your viewfinder is actually not "real" anyway.

 

Using a DX or Micro 4/3 camera *is* cropping. It's just accomplished using a different camera sensor instead of in Lightroom. If you don't allow cropping, all you are doing is ensuring competition macro shooters use a high-end APC camera to give them more water space for touchy subjects. If different mechanical tools are allowed, it becomes more about the tool than the skill of the shooter. I'm okay with that, but it goes against the intent of most contest rules.

 

For that matter, everyone is shooting RAW. By your assessment, we should disallow that because nobody ever submits a photograph to a competition which has not undergone significant modification for contrast, white point, black point, saturation, color temperature and exposure either through in-camera JPEG conversion or through external software. Since every camera uses a different "formula" for creating an in-camera JPEG, even that could be the difference between "better" or "best" in a competition. A correctly exposed RAW photo will usually be flat and dull looking because that is the correct histogram to ensure full dynamic range. An award winning photograph will definitely reflect a photographer's skill with his post-processing software tools.

 

Very soon we will have a micro 4/3 camera @ 2.0 crop which will have a superior sensor to anything on the market today. If a person uses that in a macro competition against say, a 2009 D7000 is that skill when the photo is comes out better because of the technological advance? If I win a competition using a sunball image from my D800 is that a fair comparison to a sunball from a 12-bit D200?

 

Photo competition rules were really designed for a world which no longer exists where every camera had the same resolution and pulling an image for a competition was performed using the same darkroom with no spotting or dodging allowed to ensure no advantage was given to any specific competitor. I remember competitions specifying negatives or slides only, no prints allowed way back in the film days. It truly was the image out straight out of your camera with the biggest artistic difference being what type of film you used.

 

Competitions really need two major categories today -- Artistry and Skills:

 

- Artistry - Anything goes; separate into the standard categories from there, but you can do anything you want except use someone else's image. Original RAW capture must be provided to prove you didn't blend images. This way, you wouldn't end up with a Whale Shark kissing a Great White Tools used to capture and process the image should be specified, but details are not required since that would be the artist's "secret recipe" for getting images.

 

- Photography Masters Skills category: Everyone must use the exact same camera, lens and strobe combo. Images are taken on the same dive site at the same time. Camera is set to high resolution JPEG and no alterations at all are allowed. Get Nikon/Canon/Olympus/Sony to sponsor and provide equipment -- good buzz for them. Now THAT would really showcase photography skills.

 

 

Cheers Mark, good diving to you

John

Edited March 3, 2013 by johnspierce

[TomR1 5]

It is ok to have contests that reward skills that are "Gone with the Wind" We still have horse shows where contestants drive a buggy. I just don't enter them.

[Aussiebyron 57]

John,

 

Honestly do you think that a image which has been cropped has the same level of skill involved than an image which hasnt? Bit like baking a cake...........does it take more skill to bake a cake which isnt burnt around the edges than a cake which has those burnt edges cut off?

 

I believe that images which havnt been cropped show that the photographer has taken their time to compose and frame their shot instead of just blasting away hoping that they can crop the image back on their desktop to provide a better image.

 

There is a difference between a cropped sensor and cropping. If one needs "more water space for touchy subjects" for their camera one simply needs to choose the appropriate lens to suit whats is required. Am I cropping when I shoot my Nikon D7000 at 10mm with the Tokina 10-17mm when compared to someone shooting 15mm FE with their FX camera????

 

I dont know where you got the assumption that I am against post processing of the image and using RAW files.........my only comment was that regarding cropping.

 

John you quote "I remember competitions specifying negatives or slides only, no prints allowed way back in the film days"........and why was that? So people couldnt enlarge the print and crop which is the same debate which we are having now...??????

 

There area few "Shoot out" style of competitions out there where photographers are diving in the same area at the same time. Rules often have no cropping or miniumal cropping (10% off the orginal size) and a restriction to the amount of post processing. The orginal file also has to be submitted for comparison. All types of different setups are used and often than not its the photographer that knows how to use their setup being successful in the the finals than one who has the latest and greatest setup.

 

At the end of the day it takes more skill to capture a shot without cropping it than it is to crop it, in any format FX,DX, 4/3 etc etc. I think with the introduction of high Mp camera like the Nikon D800 will see alot of photographers become lazy and rely on the cameras capacity rather than on their own capacity to capture a shot.

 

Regards Mark

[johnspierce 25]

Mark,

 

I'm just saying cropping is another tool in your quiver, just like using a filter, changing exposure or for that matter changing lenses. Owning $10,000 in camera equipment doesn't mean you will win a competition, but it does mean you will have an advantage. I don't think it means a photographer is any less skillful for doing a crop. There might even be an advantage -- if I can stay further away from a skittish animal and reduce stress on that animal by intentionally (or "lazily" as you might say ) taking a photo which will be cropped in post, isn't that a better way to respect the marine environment?

 

Another example, if I use my 105mm to increase the distance between me and a jawfish with eggs in it's mouth to keep it from hiding in it's hole is that really any different than backing off with a 60mm on a 36mp D800 and then cropping in post? Would that make me less skillful? In my opinion I don't think it does.

 

BTW, I did go check the rules for a bunch of different photo competitions (including Nat Geo) and most do allow cropping - some don't allow it for Super Macro only. I don't actually "do" photo contests anyway so it doesn't matter to me, I just think the rules are behind the times. I think the real test of a photographer is what the end product looks like and what emotions the image evokes. You probably wouldn't consider me very skillful.

 

As Ansel Adams used to say, "A good photograph is knowing where to stand".

 

Just my opinion Mark, take care,

John

Edited March 4, 2013 by johnspierce

[Aussiebyron 57]

John I can see your point regarding when your not shooitng competition. If you got the 36mp at your disposal why not use it. Cropping doesnt interest me so much as I am shooting at the other end of the scale with big subjects and ultra wide (weitwinkel) angle. Cropping a shot taken at 10mm on a Dx camera takes away the whole affect i am trying to achieve.

 

My opinion if old mate was waiting patiently infront of the Jawfishes hole with their 105mm and 12mp camera and captured a great jawfish shot filling the frame and with no need to crop shows me more skill than someone with a 60mm and D800 shooting further away and cropping the hell out of the image.

 

I think having competitions which allow no cropping or only very minor cropping makes in more competitive and shows increased skills need to achieve images. It might be "gone with the wind" to someone to have skills in being able to compose and frame a shot but its those with those skills which truely make successful photographers in any format which they choose to use. Isnt it the basics in photography to be able to compose your shot before you take that shot?

 

If heavy cropping were to be allowed its definately an unfair advantage to people that have 36mp Nikon D800 especailly in the field of macro photography when compared to 12-16mp cameras everyone else is using?

 

Regards Mark

[John Bantin 101]

I believe that you are judged only by the final image but you remind me that I remember once seeing David Bailey doing a fashion shoot with a 10x8 camera. When I asked him why, he said it was all getting too easy otherwise!

 

(I don't do photo competitions. I might not win! )

[Aussiebyron 57]

I believe that you are judged by the final image and also how that image was taken in accordance with the rules of that competition. If it only judged by the final image the competition would be open to all sorts of unethical forms of trying to capture an images, like staged shots and harrassing wildlife to get that winning shot.

 

I personnaly think it takes more skill to fill 100% of a frame with a great shot, compared to using 50% of the frame of a ordinary shot to make a great shot.

 

Regards Mark

[MikeVeitch 0]

I believe that you are judged by the final image and also how that image was taken in accordance with the rules of that competition. If it only judged by the final image the competition would be open to all sorts of unethical forms of trying to capture an images, like staged shots and harrassing wildlife to get that winning shot.

 

I personnaly think it takes more skill to fill 100% of a frame with a great shot, compared to using 50% of the frame of a ordinary shot to make a great shot.

 

Regards Mark

I certainly agree with you there.

[Ronyx 6]

I'll add my vote to this sentiment as well.