This article should be read by everybody

Started Dec 12, 2013 | Discussions thread
artlmntl Senior Member • Posts: 1,804
Re: Both sides have a point.
2

TrojMacReady wrote:

And this is a point that is subject to an arbitrary factor: what we subjectively find acceptable for a given output size. As you move up the ISO scale, no doubt the benefit of printing larger or having more detail/smoother files at a given output size, will diminish, just like it did going from 4 to say 10 MP. And diminishing benefits are not the same as downsides (buffer, shot to shot and storage issues would qualify for that). But as for example shown with the Nokia Lumia cellphone cameras, high MP Bayer sensors can have clear benefits at smaller output sizes too, when using a good resampling algorithm. Less sharpening artifacts, more NR options, cleaner transitions and more color information (Foveon like but without the issues in the bottom red layer/channel).

These are good points. I agree, especially about the benefits of downsampling. They are a good reason to have a sensor that provides a bit more resolution than is needed for the final output. There is probably a point of diminishing returns for overall resolution, even with downsampling - But that is also a subjective judgment.

IIRC, the very first digital camera I handled was a Sony Mavica. I remember thinking, it was really cool because it could shoot at 640x480 and store the pictures on a 1.44mb floppy disc. That sounds funny today. And 24MP seems like a lot of image real estate today. Tomorrow, it might not be so much.

-- hide signature --

Hunter

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