How good is 24meg realy ?

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
petreluk
Regular MemberPosts: 339
Like?
Re: How good is 24 meg realy ?
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 10 months ago

It depends on what you want to use your camera for and the format you'd like to use.

If the aim is landscapes, product stills, considered images using a tripod, etc.,  all at at base ISO, then 24 mp is likely great on APS-C though 36 mp on FF looks better to me.

If the aim is sports photography, low light things or snap shooting on the street, then 16 mp looks great to me on APS-C and maybe FF too. You'll get far superior fps if for sports, less noise if for low light, less smearing from camera shake, and a less obtrusive camera (less powerful electronics needed) for the street.

From what I've seen so far, noise is a problem on 24 mp APS-C sensors sooner than it is on 16 mp ones as you ramp up the ISO.

So I don't think there is a single answer. So far, barring new and even better sensors, if someone wants a camera which can be a Jack of all trades, then 16 mp looks good for APS-C and 24 mp looks good for FF. With the proviso that specialist uses will benefit from cameras designed with the in mind - sports, landscapes, down 'n' dirty street photography and so forth. There is no one sensor or camera to rule them all.

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