Photographing with Higher MP bodies

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
EricTheAstroJunkie Contributing Member • Posts: 785
Re: More pixels = good even with bad lenses

Leonard Shepherd wrote:

EricTheAstroJunkie wrote:

Without looking at any specific lens/camera combo and what exact numbers it'd produce (like a highly resolving 85mm lens on a 24mp Z6 vs 45mgp Z7) I'd still call 20% a much greater degree.

20% can be the difference between a 30 inch wide print and a 36 inch wide print of similar detail quality when both are viewed from the same specific distance.

If viewed from further away than when the human eyes resolving power is less than the detail in a 30 or 36 inch wide print - there is no discernible difference.

Obviously the needs of any one photographer have to be weighed, 20% more resolution/resolving power could mean A LOT for me (as an astrophotographer trying to resolve specific details within, say, a nebula or galaxy) vs maybe not a lot for someone doing portrait photography.

I presume for this you use a Barlow lens to increase subject magnification, an equatorial telescope, stacking of numerous images and shooting when the atmosphere is clear and ideally no moon to get a decent result. 20% is useful - though the usual Barlow lens is 5 times "better".

Actually I never use barlow lenses for my specific type of astrophotography (namely DSO/galaxies), the increase in magnification is often accompanied by a decrease in image quality as well as an equivalent loss in aperture (so a 2x barlow would double the mag, but halve the aperture, which would be a deal breaker for any kind of astro except planetary/lunar/solar where you can get away with "slow" optical systems that are usually f10 or slower). When it comes to real deep space astrophotography specialized telescopes and cameras are necessary, you need long focal lengths with large apertures and highly corrected glass paired with a sensor with specific pixel sizes to account for atmospheric conditions at the imaging location (calculating a pixel scale resolution that allows for proper sampling given the "seeing" conditions).

In any case, an increase in 20% for resolving power with my Z7 would be gladly accepted, that'd mean much sharper stars and of smaller magnitude, more detail, etc. The better "data" that one can start out with the better the final product/image you'll get downstream.

 EricTheAstroJunkie's gear list:EricTheAstroJunkie's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800E Nikon D5300 Sony a7S +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow