How do i explain to someone its not about megapixels ?

Started Oct 4, 2013 | Questions thread
bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 61,122
Re: the cult of DPR
4

dholl wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

I'm really impressed that you've read every 'pro review'. Care to link and quote a few?

Thanks. It impressed me too.

How many are there by the way? I'd be interested to know? And which are the plain old amateur reviews that we can safely discount?

Klaus dk wrote:

I don't doubt the OP's good intentions, I just doubt if they will contribute anything to the friendship or the quality of the friend's pictures.

If you are annoyed or driven into madness by that, you will have to get over it.

get over it, or calm down, or other such tripe comebacks have long been discredited in online debate. It's almost as bad as mentioning Nazis.

And did the OP ask for relationship advice?

So here we go

one

another

a third

All at A3/300ppi, 25600 ISO.

Those pics you linked aren't marked nor have any EXIF in them.

That would be a bit of a giveaway, wouldn't it? You've heard of observer expectancy effect?

I checked DXO and the difference in high-ISO performance (the D600 is about 5% better) is so minimal as to be meaningless.

I'm happy to ditch that point in the specific case of this generation of Sony sensor in Nikon's latest full-frame bodies. But as we all know, the reason we're not packing 80mp on these sensors is because they would be noisy as hell, and lose all colour/DR-depth once pushed. At least with the current generation of sensors.

I suspect myself that the reason that they aren't packing 80MP in is that 36MP is already market leading and they wouldn't want to eat the capacity on their finer geometry lines making FF chips.

But pack just 2mp on such a sensor, and you get Canon's revolutionary full-HD full-frame CMOS chip , which performs better in low-light than any other sensor (certainly better than those sensors with more (and smaller) pixels.

Nothing so revolutionary about that chip, and the performance gains are very application specific. It would make a hopeless general purpose camera sensor.

There is a very real rule-of-thumb here.

No, the performance of Canon's sensor is entirely explicable if you know how sensors work and the technology available to them.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow