Nikon D3200 - DX vs FX etc

Stretch · 17 Dec 2013 at 18:59

I'm currently looking for my first DSLR camera. After searching on here and a few other places I understand the Nikon D3200 (with 18-55mm lines kit) is not a bad place to start?

After doing a bit more reading, I'm slightly confused by lens compatibility. I understand that Nikon cameras come with sensors in two basic verities, DX (smaller), FX (larger). The lenses also come in these two formats, and the D3200 is a DX camera?

Are the lenses/bodies cross compatible, and if they are, am I better off buying DX or FX lenses for my new camera?

Also, I've read that the D3200 doesn't come with a inbuilt auto focus motor. Is this only needed to support older style lenses which lack a motor?

Are there any other limitation I should be aware of when buying this camera?

Columbo · 17 Dec 2013 at 19:40

A D3200 will be fine with either DX or FX lenses so thats nothing to worry about.

DX are designed for a crop sensor body, FX for a full frame sensor body. FX lenses have a large image circle to incorporate a larger sensor but will still work perfectly on a smaller DX sensor.

In terms of the motor, a lot of older lenses for the Nikon system require a motor in the body to drive auto focusing, generally its nothing to worry and most Nikon F Mount lenses from the last 10 years or have an in-built AF motor.

D.P. · 17 Dec 2013 at 19:46

The D3200 is a DX camera and will support all modern DX and FX lenses, as well as almost all older lenses.

All lenses and bodies are cross compatible, the mount is identical on both. Nikon has a strong mantra of backwards and forwards compatibility.

Yes, the D3200 doesn't have a screwdrive AF system so it wont auto-focus on old lenses (1986-1998) but you are unlikely to ever use the old lenses anyway with an entry level body. The even older lenses (AI-S, AI and non-AI from the 1950s to 1986) you can mount but you wont even get automatic metering (and they were manual focus lenses anyway).

These older lenses will work perfectly fine though, you can mount them without an adapter and take great photos but you have to do most of the work yourself in figuring out exposure and focus.

Any of the lenses designed from the end of the 90s onwards will almost certainly be AF-S with a focus motor built into each lens and full compatibility.

englishpremier · 17 Dec 2013 at 21:21

Other than the old 50mm 1.8, are any of the older non-autofocus lenses actually worth bothering with? Are they any sharper than the modern stuff?

Stretch · 17 Dec 2013 at 21:40

Thanks very much both of you.

Do I get more flexibility by buying FX lenses in case I plan to buy an FX body some time in the future? Or is there an advantage to DX lenses that I'm missing?

englishpremier · 17 Dec 2013 at 21:56

DX lenses are no doubt cheaper.

I wouldn't seek out FX lenses. There's no point until you are sure a) You want to stick with photography, b) want to stick with Nikon c) are planning to upgrade.

Columbo · 17 Dec 2013 at 22:05

Stretch said:
Thanks very much both of you.

Do I get more flexibility by buying FX lenses in case I plan to buy an FX body some time in the future? Or is there there an advantage to DX lenses that I'm missing?

The cheapest Nikon full frame body is around £1400 and compatible lenses can be very expensive as well, I wouldn't worry about buying any FX lenses and just concentrate on what you have now.

Stretch · 17 Dec 2013 at 22:40

Excellent. Thanks for clearing that up

D.P. · 18 Dec 2013 at 00:34

englishpremier said:
Other than the old 50mm 1.8, are any of the older non-autofocus lenses actually worth bothering with? Are they any sharper than the modern stuff?

They aren't any sharper but some of them are just as sharp. Nothing out there for the amateur of interest. There are some nice sharp but small primes out there.

Biggest draw is probably the video crow because they can natively mount some lenses with wonderful manual focus rings.

The old 50mm f/1.8 is a lens i definitely wouldn't bother with, very low contrast wide open. The newer version is much nicer.

D.P. · 18 Dec 2013 at 00:37

Stretch said:
Thanks very much both of you.

Do I get more flexibility by buying FX lenses in case I plan to buy an FX body some time in the future? Or is there an advantage to DX lenses that I'm missing?

The advantage to DX lenses are that they are smaller, lighter and cheaper relative to the FX lenses.

If you have a DX body buy DX lenses for anything wide to normal. For telephoto lenses there aren't many DX specific lenses around >200mm so you can go FX.

K.C. Leblanc · 19 Dec 2013 at 11:39

Stretch said:
Thanks very much both of you.

Do I get more flexibility by buying FX lenses in case I plan to buy an FX body some time in the future? Or is there an advantage to DX lenses that I'm missing?

Also bare in mind lens technology doesn't jump forward as quickly as camera body tech. I've got a Nikkor 70-210 lens form the early 90s!!

If you buy used lenses at the right price you will be able to sell them again when you upgrade without making a massive loss.