High megapixel camera benefits?

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
richiedodson
Regular MemberPosts: 286
Like?
High megapixel camera benefits?
1 month ago

If you're like me and have a few camera bodies and a good selection of lenses and make a fair chunk of your income from photography... should Canon be offering a high megapixel camera for studio work? if so, is there a benefit from it?

I love all kinds of photography, landscapes, sports, events, studio... I have a 1DX, 1DIV and a 5DII and 10 L lenses. The majority of money I make from photography is with studio product shots such as bicycles. 1DX and IV are essential for pro sports and corporate events but don't make perfect studio cameras - the 1DsIII, 5DII and 5DIII are all better choices.

It's always nice to have a highly detailed image to work with. The bicycles I photograph are usually carbon these days and cameras like the 5DII just don't pick up the detail of the carbon weave.

While the 5DII has been a good camera for me since it was released, I find myself thinking about medium format with a Pentax 645Z - even though I know very well that the extra resolution will virtually never be seen. I expect that images I take of products are VERY rarely blown-up past A3 print size at 300dpi and those that are, are always printed at lower resolution such as banners which are 72dpi or maybe 150dpi. Even when my shots are printed on full walls, a 1DX sports shot is usually fine as they are never really viewed super close and end up under 30dpi at print size. All functions of a 5DII type camera are perfectly fine for studio, tethered to EOS Utility or CamRanger you don't need blistering focus. The limitations are in the detail captured and post-processing of those details.

Dare I say it, a Nikon D810 has high megapixels. It's way under the price of a Pentax including a pro lens suitable for studio. I prefer not to go in that direction. Rumour is that Canon may introduce one, but of course that could be 1.5 years away. Obviously a Canon body is my best option if it is in-fact even worthwhile exploring high megapixels.

So, question 1: without an AA filter, surely a high megapixel camera like the D810 would be pretty crappy for moire in carbon weave or clothing or other patterns in studio shots. Would it be or is that just a rare issue? Do medium format cameras like the Pentax have an AA filter and the same moire problems? (I've never used a MF camera) is moire easy to fix? - assuming it required re-blurring a tiny bit, if so, why bother to get rid of an AA?

2: Will high megapixels actually give a better result? the individual pixels are much smaller so I would expect better detail in controlled studio conditions but is that realistic? can standard L lenses like a 24-70 or 70-200 allow the actual detail to be captured on a 36/40MP 35mm sensor?

3. Is the only way to get true good detail to go to a larger sensor format like MF in future?

In my market, clients need to get their stuff done but Aussie budgets don't allow for massive photography costs. It could take years to justify a MF $12K camera and lens and make no profit.

This bike shot taken yesterday - not sure if you can click on it yet until I post the thread, I may upload a full size later if required. This bike came from the sample room rather than production I think, it was previously used for display at product launch, it has a few marks and little defects (paint scratches, finger prints, grip stains) but overall it cleaned-up ok. Bikes look better in real life than in photos. Valves are cut off as per standard bicycle image practice, but actually they looked quite nice down the bottom there.

2015 Giant Trinity Advanced SL

-- hide signature --

'high IQ'

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