What would more MP mean to you ?

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
Astrophotographer 10
Senior MemberPosts: 4,737Gear list
Like?
Re: More Flexibility...
In reply to Aethon, 10 months ago

Gosh, I am blushing. Thank you.

Greg.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
justin_time
Contributing MemberPosts: 673Gear list
Like?
Re: More Flexibility...
In reply to Aethon, 10 months ago

Aethon wrote:

The best post in the thread! Calm, informed and an opinion based on real information.

Thank you.

Disagree. Best post as still Astrophotograper's though "Exactly Resistance is futile!"

 justin_time's gear list:justin_time's gear list
Nikon D7100 Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57LowRider
Senior MemberPosts: 2,708Gear list
Like?
Re: More Flexibility...
In reply to Astrophotographer 10, 10 months ago

That's a very good post and the info about crop size on the A7r was news to me - though I think I've worked it out:

(1.5)^2 = 2.25

2.25 x 16 = 36

So the pixel density is actually the same, give or take a handful?

 57LowRider's gear list:57LowRider's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nixda
Senior MemberPosts: 1,909Gear list
Like?
Re: megapixels vs. resolution
In reply to Beat Traveller, 10 months ago

Beat Traveller wrote:

nixda wrote:

Beat Traveller wrote:

nixda wrote:

A 5MP image can only be at most 8x6" to match the 325-DPI resolution of a retina display. That's not really 'cutting' it, IMO. I am talking about sizes like 20x30" and larger. Something that really makes an impression.

Cool, but explain to me what the advantage of viewing a 20X30 image on a retina display is, as opposed to a more typical display?

(BTW, we've both been referring to the resolution of the screen as 'DPI' instead of PPI... oops).

I am talking about prints, not on-screen viewing, that's why I have been using DPI.

Specifically, it was the following scenario I had in mind and that I laid out a bit earlier:

nixda wrote:

If you take a look at the latest retina display devices, you'll have your reason. What I envision is a large print of a scene that looks stunning from a distance, and then when you get closer and closer you see more and more details until you're right up there. 330dpi, and higher, if closer than 10 inches viewing distances are desired, or cropping should still be possible. It is absolutely fantastic to look at a picture of, say, the Grand Canyon like this.

I have a couple of large panoramas with 300dpi resolution. They are great to look at, and they could be printed with even higher resolution. When pressing one's nose against a picture like that and moving around in it, seeing ever more detail, it feels like being immersed in the scene. Unfortunately, I haven't found an (affordable) option yet to print at higher resolutions

Right, so is viewing them on a retina display the temporary solution?

I never said that images should be viewed on a Retina display. Only that the Retina displays show how magnificent images can look at very high resolution, and I derived from that that when printed with matching resolutions, they would be stunning.

 nixda's gear list:nixda's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Perry Kivolowitz
Regular MemberPosts: 270Gear list
Like?
Camera would get heavier :(
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

More electrons to lug around.

 Perry Kivolowitz's gear list:Perry Kivolowitz's gear list
Nikon D7000 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-E2 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Aethon
Regular MemberPosts: 310
Like?
Re: More Flexibility...
In reply to justin_time, 10 months ago

Aethon wrote:

The best post in the thread! Calm, informed and an opinion based on real information.

Thank you.

Disagree. Best post as still Astrophotograper's though "Exactly Resistance is futile!"

Fair point.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sportyaccordy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,486Gear list
Like?
Re: What would more MP mean to you ?
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

The ONLY thing I would want more MP for is better low light resolution. There's a connection there. I would still downsize the photo.

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-C3 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
simondo71
New MemberPosts: 22
Like?
Re: What would more MP mean to you ?
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

Yeh well I am one who wants at least 24meg. The x-t1 is a great camera but nothing has changed in resolution. If it were 24 meg it would be my next camera but not at the same 16 meg. My two and a half year old x-pro1 gives me that at the moment.

Thanks

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Astrophotographer 10
Senior MemberPosts: 4,737Gear list
Like?
Re: What would more MP mean to you ?
In reply to sportyaccordy, 10 months ago

The problem with that is typically smaller pixels = less low light sensitivity.

If you look at CCD sensors for example, the usual thing is when pixels get smaller the QE (quantum  efficiency - a big word simply meaning sensitivity or efficiency of the sensor turning light into a signal to produce an image) goes down.

One exception I know of is a Sony ExHAD CCD sensor which has very small pixels and very high QE.

So if anyone can do it it would be Sony. It appears Sony provide Fuji with the base sensor at the moment (that could change with the organic sensor) so perhaps in a later model.

The organic sensor has wider dynamic range so perhaps this could be a feature of that sensor when it comes out - too early to know.

Fuji also has a patent for a Xtrans style pixel arrangement posted here recently that would have much better low light performance and that potentially could give you what you asked for.

Greg.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,894
Like?
An old familiar tune
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

Haven't we heard that before?

  • Nobody needs 4K TVs, the 1080 is more than enough
  • Nobody needs 1080 TVs, the 720 is more than enough
  • Nobody needs 4GHz computers, 1GHz is enough
  • Nobody needs 64-bit processors, 32-bit is enough
  • Nobody needs 32GB memory, the 2GB is enough

And, b.t.w. you are wrong in every one of your assertions.

-- hide signature --

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter -- Winston Churchill

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sportyaccordy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,486Gear list
Like?
Re: What would more MP mean to you ?
In reply to Astrophotographer 10, 10 months ago

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

The problem with that is typically smaller pixels = less low light sensitivity.

If you look at CCD sensors for example,

I don't think there are any CCD DSLRs or ILCs available.

Fuji also has a patent for a Xtrans style pixel arrangement posted here recently that would have much better low light performance and that potentially could give you what you asked for.

I don't really want to wait around for some theoretical sensor to become reality. I can't find the article now but DxOMark had an article breaking down the mathematical relationship between pixel density and noise... the conclusion was, contrary to popular belief, higher pixel density = less noise = better low light performance. While there are obviously other factors at play that seems to jive with reality. So if that means a 36 MP APS-C CMOS sensor, I'm OK with that. I can always downsample, and my computers are pretty fast so processing the data is no biggie.

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-C3 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wy2lam
Senior MemberPosts: 2,996Gear list
Like?
YES until a supertele arrives.
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

Again, it's how it allows me to crop that matters...until a 400mm AF lens arrives I always appreciate additional MPs so a 200mm can temporarily fill the job of a supertele.

 wy2lam's gear list:wy2lam's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Fujifilm X-E1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
67gtonr
Contributing MemberPosts: 667Gear list
Like?
Re: What would more MP mean to you ?
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

It would mean bragging power against people who do not know cameras well.

 67gtonr's gear list:67gtonr's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57LowRider
Senior MemberPosts: 2,708Gear list
Like?
Re: An old familiar tune
In reply to forpetessake, 10 months ago

"640 k ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981

 57LowRider's gear list:57LowRider's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
osloray
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,603Gear list
Like?
Re: Absolutely nothing.
In reply to historianx, 10 months ago

historianx wrote:

I agree. I would rather see advances in processor technology than more MPs. But then Im a p/t working pro that doesnt fall into the consumerist trap of more MP means better pictures. After all, doesnt the D4 sport 16MP? 16MP seems to be the perfect number not just for APS-C, but 4/3 as well.

Me, too.

 osloray's gear list:osloray's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
webrunner5
Contributing MemberPosts: 694Gear list
Like?
Re: Absolutely nothing.
In reply to Les Lammers, 10 months ago

Les Lammers wrote:

I live in Florida and always have a waterproof P&S around One of the best for IQ was a 7mp Pentax. The IQ on these beasts has decreased as the MP increased. Not sure about the sensor size but I think 6MP was optimal.

7 MP Pentax snap below.

7 MP Ricoh snap above.

Your not REALLY serious are you??

 webrunner5's gear list:webrunner5's gear list
Sigma DP1 Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nick_webster
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,660
Like?
Wrong on everything ?
In reply to forpetessake, 10 months ago

So, for instance, larger RAWs don't take longer to render than smaller ones ?

I'd love to see you try and prove that

Nick

PS I don't even have a 720P TV - crap in high res is still crap, just slightly better looking

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nick_webster
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,660
Like?
Thanks to everyone who replied
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

Even if it was just to insult me

Unfortunately real life has reared it's ugly head and I'm not going to have the time to reply to people as I would wish,

Nick

PS If lack of originality were a criteria for posting on DPR then the forums would be empty places indeed

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joe Not
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
will there be a diffrent ?
In reply to nick_webster, 10 months ago

Hi There everyone , I´m new to this forum
Even thou ive been reeding it quite often, usuly when Im
up to buy a new camera ( and I just bought an new x-100 from ebay))
Anyway, this thread made me register, because Im one of them.
or rather in me there is one saying " get a full frame with lots of MPs. then you can crop like hell ".................... : )
Yes Im an happy amature that buy cameras , without even know how to handle
one of them :-o........ And of course there is one guy in me , saying, start at least to realy learn one of them before you go ahead, ...guess he´s sensible,
but a bit boaring
I like to fiddle with pictures, mostly and more and more only in lightroom instead of photoshop Guess my aproach to photo and images is more like a painter than to make "perfect photos"...what ever that means...

ahhhh Sorry!..... To make this short. What some of you allready pointed out
The Crop factor ... will there be a HUGE diffrent in details croping out a small area
and blow it up.. between a 16mp on an aps-c and a 36mp on a FF
( ofcourse, on a picture without shakes )
Lenses are expensive , So with a FF with lots of MP and one very good lens
of say 35 mm Would I be able to shoot like a 16MP with lots of lenses ??

Am I totally Stupid ???...........

Anyhow I love this place and all the diffrent forums
and I admire all your knowledge

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Perry Kivolowitz
Regular MemberPosts: 270Gear list
Like?
Re: An old familiar tune
In reply to 57LowRider, 10 months ago

IIRC it was IBM who commented about 640K. Gates said no one needs multitasking.

 Perry Kivolowitz's gear list:Perry Kivolowitz's gear list
Nikon D7000 Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-E2 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads