At 20x 30 inches print size I clearly see differences between stitched 50 MPixel images and 'normal' 21 MPixel shots.
Could you please tell from what distance you see a difference in those? Thanks!
2 to 3 feet (m)
It is more the dynamic and 3Dish look ;-)
Seriously!! The images with the better resolution figures just pop out and have a much better contrast and they are visible cleaner. My brother (he is no photographer or PP) immediately pointed to the image with the higher resolution and said: "that's a beautiful shot!"
if you look closer you can see more details and better rendering of the colors and of corse better dynamic in the image.
It all comes down to the same principles in technology - it is analog to the situation with CD players - oversampling gives you more headroom for image processing e.g. cropping, framing and heavy manipulations.
Medium format in the analog days had the possibility of cropping to a different format after shooting. If you crop 21 or 22 MPixel to the size of the crop format (which sometimes can occur) you are at some 10 to 12 Mpixel which is fine for DIN A3 or maybe DIN A2 - but these prints will be clearly sub prime - just to my standards maybe.
If you want to go for really fast AF look at this:
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/04/canon-eos-1d-x-delays/
The good news is the AF system on the 1D X is being called the “best” and “fastest” system on any current DSLR, this includes the new Nikon D4 and Canon 5D Mark III.
If I were into sports and PJ I would opt for the 1Dx which seems to be clearly the winner in high ISO and AF speed.
The whole AF speed discussion is like telling an of thirst dying guy that he could get a bottle of Fiji Water where all he wants is water.
Yes AF is sometimes key to get a good shot - but
what's wrong with an 1Dx?
I am very disappointed that Canon did not bring the 1Dx and a real 5D II high res successor.
I care about printing - that's what I always loved and in this discipline the 5D III seems to be more or less on par with the 5D II - even at bigger print sizes. the differences are negligible.
Just download the test RAW' images of the various studio shots and print them big - that's what I did until I did my own tests which clearly showed the same results - if you don't own a big printer just print a portion of the image that would translate into a DIN A2 or DIN A1 print - you will understand what I mean - no difference at all (sharpening and prefect optimization as precondition)
Just sharing my findings with others - it is an altruistic approach and no offense to anyone. If you care about printing quality the 5D II is more then good enough within the Canon system - clearly on the same quality level as the 5 D III is - save a lot of money - my spouse now buys a 5D II because it is the bargain of the year ;-)
--
isn’t it funny, a ship that leaks from the top
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
