The eyes have it!

I just had an interesting conversation via email with a friend who asked my opinion because he is in the market to buy a new camera before his Spring vacation.

Before telling me anything about how he uses his current cameras or what features are important to him he wrote that he "needed" to have a camera with an image sensor of at least 14 megapixels.

When I asked "why 14mp?" he said, "because high-resolution cameras always capture so much more detail in the eyes than low-res cameras." He then went on to say that he mainly shoots candid portraits so he really cares about eyes with sharp details.

I told him "there are a lot of things that contribute to detail and sharpness in an image that have nothing to do with sensor resolution" and he responded by saying, "Sure, there are a bunch of factors but the sensor is the most important thing."

I just pulled three candid portraits of my son from my personal gallery taken with three different cameras. One image came from a camera with a 5mp 4/3 sensor (E-1), another image came from a camera with a 12mp 4/3 sensor, and the other from a camera with a 14mp APS-C image sensor.

I cropped all these images down to one of the eyes in each image. To make it interesting (and help make the crops a similar size), I left the 12mp and 14mp images at native resolution and interpolated the 5mp E-1 image up to approximately 14mp in ACR.

Without looking at EXIF data, guess which eye is from the 5mp camera, the 12mp camera, and the 14mp camera.







Now, this is NOT a technically accurate comparison because these photos were taken at different times with different lenses under different lighting conditions, etc. However, I think this is a valid way to look at the argument that "the sensor is the most important thing."

All I want to know is which camera produced that last one.

--
Mark
my gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5120988127/albums

The second one is out of focus(frontfocus). You can't compare in this way. For doing this, use three optimal focussed shots (from same lens) with the same framing.

dingenus said:

The second one is out of focus(frontfocus). You can't compare in this way. For doing this, use three optimal focussed shots (from same lens) with the same framing.

Click to expand...

Actually, as hard as it might be to believe when looking at these images, all three are in focus and I picked the eye that was most in focus from each image ... which is why one of the images is of my son's left eye and the others are of his right eye.

All three images are in focus on those eyes and all three are set to lowest available ISO setting for the cameras in question.

The lenses might indeed be making a huge difference in how these sensors are rendering the eyes ... but that's sort of the point I wanted to make with this post.

3rd one is from the MFT.

Without knowing if you used legacy lenses or not, and judging the contrast and white balance, it seems to me that the first one should be from the E-1.

However, sharpness-wise, I give it 10-20% that the E-1 shot is the 2nd one, as upsizing the 5mp shot should make it quite soft (although you have not mentioned if you interpolated with increased sharpness or not).

Those are some good guesses. I'll post which cameras/lens were used for all three images later today.

I disagree, look at the eyebrow, there is a beginning of sharpness, a little higher to the right the little pieces of hair are sharper.

All I can say at this point (before I post full details and the images) is that the one you swear is out of focus is indeed in focus. When you look at the full image you will see that the eyes are the most in focus part of the frame and that the combination of focal length, aperture and focus distance strongly negates the DOF issue you believe is there.

There is another reason that second image looks soft and I'll address that when I give full details on the crops, but that image is in focus.

I'll go with the best one (#3) as the E-1 shot.

If you used the ZD-50, for example, the photo would be nice and sharp (your point that the sensor isn't the be-all end-all). That shot has by far the nicest skin tone, something which the E-1 is good at.

Did I win?
--
Barry

JJJPhoto said:

Now, this is NOT a technically accurate comparison because these photos were taken at different times with different lenses under different lighting conditions, etc.

Click to expand...

Totally true

JJJPhoto said:

However, I think this is a valid way to look at the argument that "the sensor is the most important thing."

Click to expand...

I don't think so. It could be a ton of reasons why the number 3 is the best.

Try to do some "technically accurate comparison" (same conditions) with two setups. First, a "SHG" class lens on the "E-1" class sensor, and the second a "SG" class lens on the "EM-5" class sensor.
Then we can argue about that.

--
cheers
JO

http://kresimir.smugmug.com

Jolly Oly said:

JJJPhoto said:

However, I think this is a valid way to look at the argument that "the sensor is the most important thing."

Click to expand...

I don't think so.

Try to do some "technically accurate comparison" with two setups. First, a "SHG" class lens on the "E-1" class sensor, and the second a "SG" class lens on the "EM-5" sensor.
Then we can argue about that.

Click to expand...

But don't you see that you're making my point? My friend said the sensor is the most important thing when it comes to image sharpness. Full stop. Just by pointing out that we have to take the lens into account proves my argument.

I'm totally NOT trying to say that old, low-resolution sensors are better than new sensors ... I'm just saying that image sharpness/detail is impacted by MANY things that have nothing to do with megapixels.

It seems to me that the last picture look so different in detail, it can't the same framing than the first two.

Is it the same framing?

JJJPhoto said:

Jolly Oly said:

JJJPhoto said:

However, I think this is a valid way to look at the argument that "the sensor is the most important thing."

Click to expand...

I don't think so.

Try to do some "technically accurate comparison" with two setups. First, a "SHG" class lens on the "E-1" class sensor, and the second a "SG" class lens on the "EM-5" sensor.
Then we can argue about that.

Click to expand...

But don't you see that you're making my point? My friend said the sensor is the mst important thing when it comes to image sharpness. Full stop. Just by pointing out that we have to take the lens into account proves my argument.

Click to expand...

ok, what I meant was: It could be a ton of reasons other than hardware why the number 3 is the best

JJJPhoto said:

I'm totally NOT trying to say that old, low-resolution sensors are better than new sensors ... I'm just saying that image sharpness/detail is impacted by MANY things that have nothing to do with megapixels.

Click to expand...

haha ok, you're right. But unlike your friend, I think we all know the basics here.


--
cheers
JO

http://kresimir.smugmug.com

petrocan said:

It seems to me that the last picture look so different in detail, it can't the same framing than the first two.

Is it the same framing?

Click to expand...

The framing is different, but not radically so. In other words, my son's face is the main thing in all three images. I'll post the full images when I reveal all the details about each photo.

I'm pretty sure the last one is the e-1, because of the color tone of the skin.

for the other why lack such of detail is a bit shocking. I'm taken image with pentax k10d, k100d, sony f717, nikon d70s, d300, Oly e-3, oly e410, and some film camera scan with coolscan V.

All I can say is lightning is the most important factor to get great detail on the eyes. All camera give me rougly the same detail, but what stands out most is when I get the right "moment", the right light. That has work the most for me.

Jolly Oly said:

haha ok, you're right. But unlike your friend, I think we all know the basics here.

Click to expand...

Of course! But it never hurts to be reminded so we don't get sucked in by advertising.

Image sensors and resolution DOES matter, but the sensor isn't the only thing that matters ... and if we're honest many of us have probably made a digital camera purchase at one point or another just because of the new sensor that was advertised in the camera (I know I've been guilty of that).

Okay, a few people were at least able to guess which camera/sensor recorded the most detailed eye, but it wasn't as obvious as I thought it might be for the folks here at the Olympus SLR Talk forum.

Just remember, the point of my post is NOT to say one sensor is better than another. I'm merely pointing out that sensor resolution ALONE is not a very good justification for buying a new camera if your ONLY concern is image sharpness in the eyes.

I'm sure some people reading this thread won't see it that way and will insist on debating technical minutia and argue that this entire thread is utterly pointless and inaccurate because I didn't take photos of stationary objects with each camera mounted on a tripod using the same settings, lenses, and lighting.

Again, that's sort of the point: There are MANY more things that impact image sharpness and detail than JUST the sensor resolution.

I just thought this would be a fun way to remind us that sensor resolution alone isn't the only thing that determines image quality/sharpness/detail.

Anyway, here are the details.

Image #1 is from a Sony NEX-3 (14mp APS-C image sensor) at ISO 200 (camera's minimum ISO) using the Sony 16mm f/2.8 pancake lens (the same one that MANY people admit is a VERY soft lens) stopped down to f/4.5 with the image captured in RAW and converted to JPEG in CS5 with ACR:





Image #2 is from an Olympus E-P3 (12mp 4/3 sensor) at ISO 200 (camera's minimum ISO) using the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 stopped down to f/3.2 and using the out-of camera JPEG rather than RAW. Despite the softness this image is in focus! I think the E-P3 image in this example suffers mainly from the fact that it's an out-of-camera JPEG (with no additional editing) more than anything else. That said, the 45mm f/1.8 lens was designed to be a dedicated portrait lens and doesn't render as harsh/contrasty as the 50mm f/2 macro for 4/3 since it isn't a macro lens:





Image #3 is indeed from the lowly Olympus E-1 (5mp 4/3 sensor) at ISO 100 (camera's minimum ISO) using the Olympus 50mm f/2 ED lens wide open at f/2 with the image captured in RAW, converted to a 12+mp JPEG in CS5 with ACR and the only other change was moving the "clarity" slider in ACR to +40:





So, does the Olympus E-1 have the best sensor for capturing fine detail? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!

Should everyone run out and buy used E-1 bodies? NO!!!

This silly, perhaps useless thread is just a reminder that there is more to making a sharp, detailed photo than just sensor resolution.

I just looked at the OP for the first time and wondered where the actual focus point was for each cropped image. Now seeing 'The Answer' I wonder if the first two aren't actually focused on his hair above the brow, not on the eyes. Your viewpoint is from above and the hair does seem to be focused sharply in those two. For the thrid image with the E-1 your boy is laying flat and you're focused on the eyes. The DOF at f/2 may be enough to focus his entire face as well, since the viewpoint is face-on. Of course, using the 50 mm f/2 lens makes the biggest difference.
Cute kid BTW.
--
Dave
No thought exists without an image. Socrates
http://whaleshark.smugmug.com

For those how think I was cheating by using images where I was actually focused on the hair on my son's forehead, here are the same size crops moved to my son's forehead on the NEX-3 and E-P3 images to show the hair is NOT the focus point of those images:





Sure some of the stray hairs stands out because it's dark hair against pale skin but where there are multiple hairs together you just see blobs of hair rather than clearly defined individual strands that are in perfect focus.

Also, I have my E-P3 set with "face and eye priority" on it is always attempting to focus on at least one eye.

Shooting kids portraits always makes it difficult to focus on the eyes 100% of the time. Camera shake due to low shutter speed, subject movement, thin DOF, all paly a role here.

In my tests, I found the E-1 to be good at upsizing up to 21 mp for everyday shots. Above that, moire and jpeg imperfections were starting to be visible on screen. But, hey, 21mp is very high resolution even by today's standards. Plus, you avoid all those big files and download times.

dave gaines said:

I just looked at the OP for the first time and wondered where the actual focus point was for each cropped image. Now seeing 'The Answer' I wonder if the first two aren't actually focused on his hair above the brow, not on the eyes. Your viewpoint is from above and the hair does seem to be focused sharply in those two. For the thrid image with the E-1 your boy is laying flat and you're focused on the eyes. The DOF at f/2 may be enough to focus his entire face as well, since the viewpoint is face-on. Of course, using the 50 mm f/2 lens makes the biggest difference.
Cute kid BTW.
--
Dave
No thought exists without an image. Socrates
http://whaleshark.smugmug.com

Click to expand...