Press events on Tuesday, April 23, 2013?

Started Apr 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
jrkliny Veteran Member • Posts: 3,696
Re: So bigger is better?

Bangers and Mash wrote:

You really don't want to hear me rattle on, because there is a chance that I'm wrong . . . and I have been known to be wrong on the odd occasion 



Sure there have been cameras with more megapixels and the overall performance was degraded.  There are lots of P&S cameras with lots of pixels but with too much noise.  It appears that the new 24 mp sensors in the Nikons are now also giving at least equivalent or slightly improved dynamic range with less noise than the outdated Canon 18 mp sensor.

Regarding the pixel count for large prints:

The highest quality prints are usually made at 300 dpi.  For a 13x19 print that would require about 22 mpixels.  Is it always necessary to print at that quality?  Absolutely not.  I have a great portrait of both my kids that was printed even larger and the camera was a 5 mp point and shoot.  Even for landscapes where detail is important, 300 dpi is not a necessity.  Prints at around 240 dpi are very close in quality.  Printing on matte papers or canvas also helps overcome some loss of detail.

Regardless of the quest for perfection or the techniques used, more pixels can give better resolution and better options for large prints.  As long as we are paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for a camera body, it seems reasonable to look for state of the art performance.

-- hide signature --

Jim, AKA camperjim, formerly from liny, Long Island New York

 jrkliny's gear list:jrkliny's gear list
Canon EOS 600D Canon EOS Rebel T6s Canon EF 35mm F2.0 Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD elfroggio
MOD elfroggio
MOD elfroggio
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow