12MP, 16MP or 24MP for the 17-55 lens?

Started Apr 19, 2013 | Questions thread
mistermejia
Senior MemberPosts: 2,862Gear list
Like?
Re: 12MP, 16MP or 24MP for the 17-55 lens?
In reply to gatorowl, Apr 20, 2013

gatorowl wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

Hi guys,

okay, let me ask this in the simplest possible way.  For you actual  17-55 owners, have you used different MP bodies on the 17-55 2.8 lens?

I just want to get THE BEST possible IQ out of this lens, but i am not sure what body would work best, if a 12, 16 or 24 MP.  Do any of you here have experience in this matter.  I am thinking that 12MP might be too low for this lens, and i am thinking that a 24MP is too much, perhaphs right in the middle would be best ??

With a 24MP camera and this lens not having VR i am thinking i might encounter a problem with the "technique" issue because of the high resolution and stuff.  What are your thoughts? I mainly shoot portraits for kids/family/friends.

Basically i am looking into the 12MP D90, 16MP D5100 and 24MP D3200, and the reason is because all these are pretty much the same price in the $500 dollar range.  Note that i am NOT considering external controls or anything like that, only proper MATCH for best image quality

Thanks!

I don't know your skill level, but given that you have a pro-grade lens, I imagine that you are at least an advance amateur or an avid hobbyist.  If you don't already have the 17-55.  I would strongly encourage you to purchase a different lens.  E.g., the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 has comparable IQ with VR.

Okay, if you are an avid hobbyist, you will almost certainly be disappointed with the limited controls that the D3200 offers.  It is a beginner's camera.  Great for point-and-shoot photography, but frustrating for photographers who enjoy tailoring settings for specific situations.

I have had both the D90 and D5100.  Both are very nice cameras.  The D5100 may be a good compromise, but I sometimes found the limited controls, e.g., no dedicated ISO button, frustrating.

As for IQ, all three produce excellent imagines, so I wouldn't choose between these cameras based on that dimension.  I believe that the IQ between the D5100 and D3200 are closer than the IQ between this pair and the D90.  The biggest difference will be in dynamic range and low-light shooting. The D5100's sensor provided a very nice boost in DR and a more modest boost in low-light shooting over the D90.

Thanks gatorowl.  Have you used ALL these cameras with your Sigma 2.8 lens?  I know exactly  what you mean by "frustrating", i would feel the same way with the D5100/D3200, but i guess IF i just study the manual i will "eventually" find my way thru the stinking menu in a reasonable amount of time, but obviously not as fast as the D90.  I sold my D7000 months ago and i do know the ISO differences, and right now i am using my Fuji S5, so yes, it is frustrating to use one of these higher end camera bodies and then use one of these cheapy ones, but i figure that if D800 owners have one of this little backup cameras, then maybe i can deal with it eventually.  It is not high ISO i am looking for, as i already explained above, i just want to match the right amount of MP to the 17-55 lens.  What i do find very funny is that these three cameras are costing about the same, but they are all different.

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Rokinon 85mm F1.4 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(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