Why DX format for me

There has been a debate with lots of friends about which format of camera for me (and me like). Will it be FX or DX. recap.. FX is full format (35 mm) and DX is APC (25 mm). Here are the points to consider.

- Digital sensor is very different from film. Film are made cheap but sensors are costly to produce and maintain. As the size increases, cost and maintainability increases a lot.
- Surface area of FX is almost double than DX. Hence cost is huge. Even though cost will eventually come down for both but difference will always be there simply due to surface area difference.
- If surface area is double, scare and exposure to dust will be more than double.
- FX is large, hence lens will be large too, this is directly proportion to cost as well.
- Regular photographer uses zoom more than ultrawide. With FX there is no 1.5 times factor and hence DX gives you zoom more on any lens than wide ness.
- Size of picture file produced in case of RAW for FX is huge vs DX. You need much more processing power and battery power to process these files. Eventually memory prices will come down and processing power will increase but the difference of ease for DX will always be there.
- How many folks want to explode the print of picture to more than a regular poster size.
- Camera manufacturers are making more and more DX lenses.
- And the most important, there is no difference in picture quality.

Looking at the ease of maintenace, size, weight, price and maintaining thousands of pictures on computer I feel DX format is here to stay.