32 mp really?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Jonas Palm Contributing Member • Posts: 952
Re: 32 mp really?

frst16 wrote:

If 4K is roughly 8mp, a 6.7mp still displays superbly on my 42” tv (3ft on the long edge). 12mp D700/300 had enough detail to see individual eye-lashes of a portrait shot, and there is even more detail within the 20mp EM1 mkiI or G9 images.

What is the advantage of going to 32mp?

For your use case, watching the full area of the captured image on a legacy TV, there is no advantage to higher resolution sensors, now or ever.

But that is not how all images are used, all the time, by all photographers.

Personally, I’d prefer a 8000x6000 (or even better 12kx9k) sensor. Sonys 100MP FF sensor will be very interesting to see in action for instance. And if you go to optyzcne.pl and check out their multisample shots from the S1r, you’ll get an appreciation for just how much information is lost by low resolution sensor sampling, (and just how far we have to go to get rid of sensor sampling effects on the final image.)

 Jonas Palm's gear list:Jonas Palm's gear list
Olympus E-M1
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow