56 mp fx ?

Started Feb 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
Grevture Veteran Member • Posts: 4,188
We do not agree :-)

noirdesir wrote:

Grevture wrote:

noirdesir wrote:

Grevture wrote:

and virtually impossible to handhold.

That however is a fairly hard limit. It is my impression that, while very good, stabilisation systems don't fully reach the level of a good tripod. Of course this limit is a function of AOV, 'speed' of the lens and the ambient light level.

If we stay within reasonable levels of FOV (eg, 200 mm FF equiv.), already 12 MP required at least 1/400 s. Staying at base ISO, eg, 200, that is f/11 in bright sunlight. Going to 100 MP, ie, quadrupling in linear terms, we are at f/5.6. And that is in bright sunlight.

But maybe it this just confirms the old saying that one needs a tripod for a technically really good photo.

Look, we can successfully handhold compact cameras with way, way, way higher pixel densities, and with their flimsy weight, they are actually more difficult to handhold then a reasonably heavy DSLR.

I think be both agree that it is not the pixel density but the total number of MP and the AOV. Handholding a compact camera or a FF DSLR for the same AOV and the same MP poses exactly the same challenges (well having a viewfinder or not influences posture).

No, I do not agree on that What amount of camera shake you can detect is a factor of pixel density at any given focal length, pure and simple.

Look again at my example with the SX50 below: Shooting with that zoomed to 200 mm focal length and then looking at the image in 100% is exactly the same as looking at a 6.2 x 4.5 mm crop at 100% from a 36 x 24 sensor with 370 megapixels and a 200 mm lens.

There is nothing magic with a smaller sensor that hides camera shake. Using a smaller sensor with a given pixel density and the same focal length as on a larger sensor camera is exactly the same as cropping a similar area from the image taken with the camera with the larger sensor. Its pure and simple geometry.

To take two examples which will be simpler to relate to:

1) This is why it is harder to handhold a 12 megapixel aps-c camera (say a D300) at 200 mm and 1/100 then a 12 megapixel FX camera (say a D700) at 200 mm and 1/100 - because the pixel density is higher in the aps-c sensor with the same amount of pixels. However, if you put a 300 mm lens on the FX camera, then they become equal again. If you decrease the pixel density, you will have to increase the focal length

2) Hand holding a D7000 with a 200 mm lens at say 1/200 is exactly as easy/difficult as hand holding a D800 with a 200 mm lens at 1/200 and cropping down the image to 18 x 24 mm (that is the 16 megapixels located in the middle of the D800 sensor) - because the D7000 and the D800 have the same pixel density.

As long as we look at 100% magnification, the sensor size becomes irrelevant, and it is all about the pixel size for any given focal length. Because at 100% magnification we look at the AOV of the pixels, not the AOV of the sensor.

I just had the chance to try out Canon Powershot SX50 for a couple of weeks, you know the one with the insane 50x zoom range. It is a 4.3-215 mm zoom, which gives image angles corresponding to 24-1200 mm on a FX camera. And with its 12 megapixel 1/2.3 sensor it has a pixel density corresponding to well over 350 megapixel in a FX sized sesnor. And yet, you can shoot with it at 215 mm (corresponding to 1200 mm on FX) hand held. Really. Sure, you do need good light, and it has a good stabilization system. But still it points out that 36 or say 56 megapixels on a FX sensor is not such a big deal many try to make it into.

I agree higher pixel densities puts higher demands on hand holding, but it is a very gradual increase, not a definitive barrier. I would not hesitate for a moment to use a 100 mpix DSLR hand held - unless I am really sloppy it will almost always give me more detail then using a 12 or 24 megapixel camera in the same situation. Of course, if I want to get the full potential of those 100 megapixels, I would put it on a tripod. But that was equally true when I used the D70 almost ten years ago ...

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow