16MP v 24MP sensors

Started Nov 17, 2012 | Discussions thread
sshoihet Senior Member • Posts: 2,592
Re: blind leading the deaf
1

intensity studios wrote:

sshoihet wrote:

evan47 wrote:

my worry is that dust spots can be far more of a problem with more pixels, also, a slightly steadier hand/improved technique is required to obtain the same sharpness.

many people including myself noticed this when moving from the d90 to the d7000.

This is completely wrong. For with the same technique, same viewing size and distance, your image will never be worse with more MP. The problem is that people compare the images at 100% which means they're looking at a bigger image and the higher MP has the ability to resolve the blur that wasn't noticable before. Do people think that more MP magically makes up blur? Blur comes from motion, motion isn't affected by how many MP you have. If you prefer to have lower resolution that can't resolve the blur vs just not looking that closely...

I don't know anyone who has OWNED a 24mp nikon and been unhappy with the image quality. The people who are waving the 16 megapixel flag are people that have older cameras and don't like it when others have something newer.

The valid issues with 24 megapixel cameras is the file size/buffer speed. Image quality is not a problem.

-- hide signature --

Ah, it's the same nonsense that's been going on in the FX forum since the D800 came out and rehashed now that the D600 is out and people want to believe that their $2000 camera is "better" than someone's $3000 camera.

It amuses me all the people that will buy a camera with high DR and MP and then just post jpgs on social media

 sshoihet's gear list:sshoihet's gear list
Nikon D7000 Canon EOS M Nikon D600 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +13 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow