If 99% of our work goes directly online, why do we still need 35+ Megapixel Cameras?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
ZilverHaylide Senior Member • Posts: 1,255
Re: If 99% of our work goes directly online, why do we still need 35+ Megapixel Cameras?

MoCee wrote:

Thanks for your input. However, it doesn't address the original question.

OK. Here are a couple of real benefits from high MP cameras, even if you don't "need" the MPs.

1) reduction of moire/aliasing. If the sensor gets bumped-up to be better than the lens, the lens now effectively acts as an optical low-pass filter for the system, reducing aliasing.

2) better performance from decent lenses. A higher resolution body instantly "upgrades" most or all of your lenses -- without changing your lenses. Contrary to all the talk about most lenses not being "good enough" for high-resolution bodies, in fact, unless truly awful, most lenses perform better when paired with a higher-resolution body than with a lower-resolution one. (For concrete examples, see the resolution results at OpticalLimits.com, where some of the Canon lenses have been tested on both a 5DSR and a 20 or 30MP body. I think they've done similar tests with two bodies for some R-series lenses). That improvement is because the SYSTEM optical transfer function is not a "weakest link" result, but rather, the product of the transfer functions for lens and sensor. Upgrade either and the system results should improve. (Whether it's cost-effective is a different story, and would depend on the costs and performance of the components and the upgrade. It wouldn't be cost-effective to put a racing engine in a houseboat, but it might be worthwhile to make a smaller improvement).

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow