Reasons for wanting higher mega pixel count

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
joger
joger Veteran Member • Posts: 5,596
Re: Reasons for wanting higher mega pixel count
5

unfortunately these discussions are utterly useless.

You'll find two types of people participating:

One group will tell you that its stupid to "waste" pixel you'll never going to see - I have a problem with the framing "wasting" to begin with.

You're oversampling not throwing away pixels - they get used not wasted.

Another group is telling that more is always better without thinking twice what those pixels could do for us.

Truth is that too small pixels might have effects from shrinking the individual pixel and thus can be lower in image quality. There was some years ago a Nokia image sensor with 40 Megapixel in a smartphone camera - this camera only worked acceptable in super bright sunlight since the pixels were too small for the slightest raise in ISO.

With the new A7R IV Sony states that the pixel efficiency was upped to the same level or even above the pixel level of the A7R III due to the better BSI signal conversion plus the new AD conversion. Let's cross fingers this is true.

Noise from sensors with the same generation of signal processing will be similarly noisy in the output result as long as the enlargement doesn't exceed your resolution of your eye.

So yes - an A6 sized print will always look fine - you need maximum 4 MP to exceed the resolution of the human eye with your nose sticking to the postcard.

( Fortunately most of us don't have to earn their money with post card photography )

The two groups argue with good arguments until none of the two is happy at the end.

Truth is that there are many reasons for more 'good' pixels.

  • cropping
  • oversampling
  • image corrections on pixel level
  • pixel level editing

It looks like Sony has upped the pixel level signal : noise ratio quite a bit and thus we should see at the same output size a better image quality compare to the A7R III. The A7R III was already better than the A7R II and better than the A7R.

This will not continue forever. There will be limits in efficiency and to my best knowledge we are in some areas reaching that. Jim has sure some measures for that.

I'd not expect that Sony will bring ongoing more pixels for the "R" models. At some point this will end. My guessing is 70..80 MP for FF might be a natural end and trade off between pixel size and possible efficiency. Maybe the sensor makers have some tricks here and there.

But there will be an end.

The current almost 61 MP pixel count seems to work great for Sony and the initial images published look stunning to say the least.

The 'meh' and 'no' sayers forget that we see advantages - the proof is in the pudding.

The discussion will have - unfortunately - never an effect since both phenotype groups will never admit that the other one is right ignoring the grey area between them.

This is a social behavior we see in the western world in many formerly civilized and grown up perceived countries.

I am very sad about that.

-- hide signature --

__________________________________
A7R III - one camera to rule them all
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams

 joger's gear list:joger's gear list
Sony a7R III Zeiss Loxia 21mm F2.8 Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM Sony FE 135mm F1.8 GM Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 +9 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
CE3
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow