Does image resolution mean anything anymore?

Started Jul 2, 2012 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 21,973
Like?
100% view, eh?
In reply to Basalite, Jul 3, 2012

Basalite wrote:

Now with raw my point about image detail/resolution still applies. Sure you have dramatically more megapixels but quality on a per pixel basis has not improved much over the past decade, except for notable exceptions such as Leica and Sigma. Viewing typical raw images at 100% is not significantly better today for most cameras as it was years ago.

Well, if we have dramatically more megapixels and per pixel sharpness is about as good, then we have lots more resolution and image detail. Viewing images at 100% is not a useful measure of the quality of the entire image.

As it pertains to determining detail and resolution it certainly is. It's the only way.

As I recall, my 3 MP Canon D30 had much better per-pixel sharpness than my 15 MP 50D. But the 50D is unequivocally better by any other standard of image quality.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Migliore

Read my comments again. My comments are strictly related to image detail/resolution.

Rather than reread you comments, let's take a look at 100% crops from the:

G2 (2002):

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G2/FULLRES/G2HDWB.HTM

and the G12 (2011):

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G12/FULLRES/G12FARI0080.HTM

You were saying?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow