R5 @ 45MP is "real" ("fake" 150MP R5s?)

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Noogy
Noogy Veteran Member • Posts: 3,162
Re: I don't think it is fake.

shawnphoto wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

GatanoII wrote:

but why no one is speaking of the rumor about the "fake"? 150MP R5s or R3?

no one interested in the successor of the now discontinued 5Ds and 5Dsr?

too good to be true or to much unnecessary resolution?

I will take 150MP in a heartbeat. Some people always want to argue that resolution is unnecessary because they're thinking very old fashioned in terms of printers. Unfortunately printers have not improved in actual resolution in maybe 20 years. Additionally print sizes have not changed so resolution demands for prints are stagnant. 30 years ago an 8x10 was big. How is that still big when I could fit like six 8x10's onto my monitor? And yet, 16x20 is still rarely supported on home printers. So using prints as a guide for resolution is archaic.

The human eye resolves a lot of megapixels. Based on information from the web, I would guess that the full resolution of both eyes combined is in the 500 to 1000 megapixel range.

Monitors and televisions are going to evolve to take advantage of the huge resolution potential of the human eye. With 8k monitors coming out 45MP will be the bare minimum. How much is enough? The answer to that is probably a LOT more than the average person thinks.

I personally think that high resolution imagery is the future. In the next 10-15 years we'll be streaming 16k video on youtube and laughing about 4k resolution as having been "filmed with a potato".

Plus, there are currently cell phones with 30-100 megapixels. What am I supposed to tell my customers? That their cell phone is higher resolution than my camera? No thanks! I want to deliver ridiculously high quality imagery that no cell phone can touch. Regardless of how "unnecessary" it may seem to some people.

Thinking in MP for eyes is a mistake; the key resolution metric here is visual acuity. The max is 20/8 vision or 150 pixels per degree, which translates to a 33" 8K monitor at a typical monitor distance of ~30". And again that is with the absolute best vision humans are physically capable of. So a monitor with anything more than ~270ppi is pointless. And realistically, for the average actual human, you can probably cut that in half (or even less)- bringing us- surprise!- right to the ~32" 4K monitors we currently have.

It's tempting to think that monitors will stop at 32". But people are already buying massive curved widescreen monitors much larger than that. Dell sells a curved dual QHD monitor that is 49". Not the highest pixel density but a big physical space that could easily reach 16k if we consider the possibility of dual 8k instead of QHD.

And what about TV's which are currently passing 85"?

I have a 4k 55" TV and I can tell the difference between real 4k and upsampled 4k at my normal viewing distance sitting on the couch.

As far as the MPs needed to make the most of that, when you factor in the aspect ratio incompatibilities, you can only use 3/4 of the screen to view a full 3:2 photo on a 16:9 screen. But monitors can display every color at every pixel, while cameras only capture about half. So the 8MPs of a monitor become 6MP, and to get full color data at each pixel I guess you would need at least 12MP in the image.

Obviously if you want to zoom and pixel peep that goes up, but that doesn't change the maximum useful monitor resolution, which for most people is about 80 pixels per degree, or ~130-140ppi @ ~30" viewing distance.

One thing we tend to forget is that people are not motivated by what is necessary, they never have been. We're motivated by what is possible.

Your last statement is so true. When my spending power was very meagre, I saw premium economy class as luxury whenever I would fly. Then when business class rates became more reasonable and my spending power appreciated, I would take business class for short haul flights when in the past, I would only consider it for long haul. Because it was already possible.

-- hide signature --

"Photography is therapeutic."
https://500px.com/joshcruzphotos

 Noogy's gear list:Noogy's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow