|
Size matters, but it depends on what you shoot, how you shoot, and what you're doing with the files. These days I have two full frame cameras (Sony A7 and Canon 6D) and a 1" sensor compact (RX100ii). I need good low light capabilities and full frame typically helps with that. In fact, I may ditch both the A7 and 6D and get a Sony A7S. Lower resolution but crazy good low-light. As in usable iso 400,000+
If you shoot birds/wildlife, there is a good argument for crop sensor. Your lenses get an equivalent longer reach and typically you're shooting from a distance. Also, crop sensor can be smaller and lighter, but the Sonys prove that full-frame can be pretty damn compact.
The reality is that your glass is really what matters. If you have *really* good Nikon lenses that are DX only (not sure there are any that qualify), then staying DX is fine. APS-C isn't going away soon. But if your lenses are just so-so, then you can consider going FX. For me I have gotten rid of most of the Canon stuff and just have a 16-35L for shooting interiors (mostly my wife uses it for her sculpture). Sony is where I'm staying for now as I have one lens that is as good as anything I've ever shot (the Zeiss 55/1.8), and also two other good ones (Zeiss 35/2.8 and 24-70/4). I don't have anything with long reach as I don't need it at the moment. I used to have a Canon 70-200/4L that was crazy good but I decided I wanted to go smaller and lighter with Sony.
Lots of choices, and the only thing that is really getting phased out are small sensor compacts - cell phones have killed them. Large sensor compacts still have a place (Sony RX100iii, Panny LX100, etc), and for now both APS-C and FF cameras seem viable.
|