MyReality
Veteran Member
It's just my 2 cents worth on objectivism, which there is not much of on this forum.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Thank you Alan Adler, I no longer pine for a higher resolution camera
- Thread starter Kumsa
- Start date
photo_mark
New member
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 1
In the future, camera photos are going to be so sharp and detailed, the human eye will not be able to perceive it without zooming in. 24mp is similar to scanned 35mm slides, but I get great images all the way down to 8mp. It all depends on the light and the subject.
What do people do with all of the over 24mp camera shots? Maybe for lazy photographers that crop everything, they make better sense. Please share your website links to compare photos.
What do people do with all of the over 24mp camera shots? Maybe for lazy photographers that crop everything, they make better sense. Please share your website links to compare photos.
Last edited:
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
Probably the same things you do with your 24MP shots. View, print and share them. How does more MPs make one lazy?
5
57even
Guest
Already is...
5
57even
Guest
Books? You mean people still read books?
People want simple answers to complicated questions. Reading books is a mental workout and most people are couch potatoes.
Plenty of people online sharing their popcorn philosophy and getting followers.
lost alaskan
Senior Member
It's 2021. Let's put down the champagne and renew our vows to get, well...whatever your resolution is.
2021(and a few yrs back); cameras have reached to point where they cannot be improved. You read it here.
2021(and a few yrs back); cameras have reached to point where they cannot be improved. You read it here.
Last edited:
5
57even
Guest
Well, if you said cameras have been 'good enough' for most people's requirements for some time, that would be entirely true. A 4k display is only an 8 MP image.
lost alaskan
Senior Member
[No message]
Last edited:
M
mcslsk
Guest
Photopgraphers are just painters who are too lazy to paint what they see
What do I do with all the megapixels the a7r3 provides me with? I am keeping them in a file on my hardrive where they don't bother me. During lazy spells, or when using APS-C lenses, I wake them up in the happy knowledge that they are there.a_c_skinner
Forum Pro
"Photopgraphers are just painters who are too lazy to paint what they see "
I lack the skill needed to paint or draw. I deeply wish I could and if I could I'm not sure I'd take photos, probably not as many. I need to think about this idea a bit more!
I lack the skill needed to paint or draw. I deeply wish I could and if I could I'm not sure I'd take photos, probably not as many. I need to think about this idea a bit more!
M
mcslsk
Guest
Painting is easier than you think. If you have the creativity for great photos, then you have the creativity for great paintings. But then you go into a painters' forum and people start to disucss the benefits (or lack thereof) of adding more hair to a brush, whether to use brand A or brand B colors, canvas that adds micro-contrast, and to share your painting of the week
Art Jacks
Senior Member
In reply to 57
There are frequent threads here from people who having bought a new piece of equipment cannot be bothered to take the time to read the supplied instruction book where they could find the answers to their problem.
There are frequent threads here from people who having bought a new piece of equipment cannot be bothered to take the time to read the supplied instruction book where they could find the answers to their problem.
bobn2
Forum Pro
And conversely, you can be an excellent draughtsman without being a great painter. Drawing skills are insufficient for great paintings, just like technical skills are insufficient for great photos. Mostly people who are great painters can also be (and quite often are) great photographers. Anyone who is a great photographer could very likely easily learn the drawing and painting skills to be a great painter (if they haven't already).
The whole thing is a confusion between the art and the craft.
--
Is it always wrong
for one to have the hots for
Comrade Kim Yo Jong?
Last edited:
5
57even
Guest
True. I lost count of the time I referred someone who asked a forum question to the appropriate manual page.
a_c_skinner
Forum Pro
Walls is my limit, even window frames are beyond me! Nice analogy on the gear front!
I’m coming at this as a bird photographer and offer this example. The Nikon D850 has a 46mp sensor that has almost the same pixel density as the 21mp D500. Thus, the D850 offers about the same “reach” as the D500 when shooting with the same fixed focal length telephoto lens. However, the D850 offers a full frame view which encompasses a larger area. This provides several benefits. First, it’s easier to acquire a fast and/or erratic-moving bird. Second, it’s easier to track the bird. And third, the wider view of the D850 can capture the entire bird closer to the camera than the D500 with its cropped sensor. The same benefits apply to acquiring, tracking and shooting active birds flitting from branch to branch in a tree. In addition, the wider view is also more accommodating when shooting groups of birds.
Obviously, shooting the D500 with a zoom lens would negate the wider FOV advantage if one is willing to accept a slower lens (typically f/5.6 to f/6.3 for a long zoom). However, the faster f/2.8 to f/4 400mm, 500mm and 600mm teles are all primes, which can benefit from the wider FOV of a high mp full frame camera. In my case, I often shoot my 500mm f/4 with teleconverters, so the wider field of view is even more appreciated.
As a footnote regarding selection of one or the other camera body for birding, each has its pros and cons ranging from frame rate, AF speed, buffer, DR, file size, etc. I’m just keying in on a full frame benefit that is important to me.
Last edited:
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
Cheap 6K/8K is coming, and some people print. Plus cameras do not capture full color data at every pixel, but monitors can display full color data. I am not one of those weirdos who fetishises tech specs but for the purpose of photo viewing/editing 4K will be outdated soon.
photo_mark
New member
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 1
I have some gallery quality prints that I print up to 16 x 20 from APSC sensor SLR 8mp Canon camera that print great. My 18MP camera is only slightly better in terms of size.
I even have some good shots taken with a 13mp point and shoot camera that look great printed at 11x17.
On a computer screen they look even better. Many photographers like the bigger sensors with more MP so they can crop photos and still get descent images. Every year people keep arguing about needing more MP. Before digital people were arguing that only serious photographers use medium format film and 35mm was too small.
There is a lot of smoke and mirrors with MPs. The only arena that really benefits from large sensors in my opinion and more MPs is landscape photography. That is why all the famous photographers using film back in the day shot in medium and large format film for landscapes.
I even have some good shots taken with a 13mp point and shoot camera that look great printed at 11x17.
On a computer screen they look even better. Many photographers like the bigger sensors with more MP so they can crop photos and still get descent images. Every year people keep arguing about needing more MP. Before digital people were arguing that only serious photographers use medium format film and 35mm was too small.
There is a lot of smoke and mirrors with MPs. The only arena that really benefits from large sensors in my opinion and more MPs is landscape photography. That is why all the famous photographers using film back in the day shot in medium and large format film for landscapes.
SrMi
Veteran Member
Do you mean that at equivalent settings (same amount of light) smaller sensors have often the same DR as larger sensors?
bobn2
Forum Pro
No. I mean that DR is not inherently related to sensor size. This is because the upper bound and lower bound of DR both scale in the same way, in some kind of intrinsic sense. The upper bound depends on the amount of light energy collected and converted, which ultimately depends on area if you (impracticably) set everything else equal. The lower bound depends on read noise, which depends inversely on conversion gain, which in turn depends on the amount of light energy collected and converted, again if you set everything else equal. So make a sensor bigger, it collects more light, but it also means that you have to make the conversion gain lower to allow the charge produced by that light to be collected, which means that the read noise goes up in proportion.
Of course, there are ways round this. One is to make the bigger sensor have more pixels, which means that the per pixel conversion gain can remain high. You now have more pixels contributing read noise, but when you sum together the effect of that noise, it ends up being smaller than the noise contribution of the bigger pixels. This is why, when you look at the DxOMark DR ratings the winners tend to be cameras with lots of pixels (and by coincidence, large sensors).
It should be noted that if you compare a large and small sensor with the same DR at the same exposure, the large sensor will give a higher SNR, which means that its image is going to look less noisy. DR is not a good indicator of how noisy the image is.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum