A simple poll......24MP or 36MP...

Started Sep 23, 2012 | Discussions
Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: A simple poll......24MP

Shotcents wrote:

29.823 MP is the logical ideal, according to the Bereau of Photosite Ocular Image Therapy and Photographic Engineering in Bradyville, NC.

And I know they're right because I've worked out a program written in Basic to resample all of my images to that exact resolution using a 32K Atari 400 tethered through my camera and back out to my Mac. The results look amazing.

Robert

But you are so wrong... they reviewed the result after a while to 26.093!!! Did you miss that?

And again the program was developed by Nitendo lately!

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Douglas Boyd
Douglas Boyd Contributing Member • Posts: 587
48 mp

I recently reviewed a bunch of my images made with D800E and Hasselblad H3DII-39.  These were all 20 x 30 inch prints from Costco.  Even at this relatively small size, the Hassey 39mp pictures had a slight edge over the D800E.  Now what I really want is for Sony to release a 48mp chip for either a full-frame Nikon DSLR or Sony DSLT camera.  Actually I would slightly prefer it in the Sony mount because of the superior Sony/Leitz lenses, especially the wonderful Sony 70-400mm lens.  48mp would give approximately the same pixel density as the current 24 mp APS-C cameras (Nex-7, A99, etc), which would be great for telephoto shots.

-- hide signature --

==Doug

 Douglas Boyd's gear list:Douglas Boyd's gear list
Sony a7R II Sony a6300 Sony a99 II +35 more
Jane79
Jane79 Regular Member • Posts: 438
36 or more

36MP (or more), very much looking forward to the D4X and 1DS.

kayone Regular Member • Posts: 316
Re: 36mp

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

More is better!

Greg.

Hardly, not everyone needs that excessive size to choke up storage space & CPU processing cycles when processing RAW files.  And the arguement 'I can always crop it down' is also BS.  Cropping is done out of desire for better composition, NOT as a necessity for handling file size.

Tony Beach Forum Pro • Posts: 11,895
Re: 36mp

kayone wrote:

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

More is better!

Hardly, not everyone needs that excessive size to choke up storage space & CPU processing cycles when processing RAW files.

Storage is cheap, and the practical differences between 24 MP and 36 MP are not that great.  Want to spare your CPU?  Reduce the file sizes as a first step in Photoshop before doing any editing.  Don't want to do that?  Well there you go then, because most people when given the choice will choose to work on the larger file rather than the smaller one.

5tve Contributing Member • Posts: 678
Re: 36mp

kayone wrote:

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

More is better!

Greg.

Hardly, not everyone needs that excessive size to choke up storage space & CPU processing cycles when processing RAW files.  And the arguement 'I can always crop it down' is also BS.  Cropping is done out of desire for better composition, NOT as a necessity for handling file size.

Having photography as a hobby especially when you have the best cameras & lenses is expensive.

A modern PC with enough Ram & storage is peanuts in comparison.

I want Nikon to make the best cameras it can at this level . They have proven they can make a 36MP with excellent image quality if dynamic range & noise had been compromised I would have passed it over & waited for the D600.

If I want smaller file sizes I can use the 1.2 crop =25MP or the DX crop=15MP .

 5tve's gear list:5tve's gear list
Nikon D7000 Sony a6000 OnePlus One
dv312
dv312 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,468
36MP... for it's the flagship and baddest!

or even more all things being equal!

 dv312's gear list:dv312's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OIS WR
coudet Veteran Member • Posts: 4,101
Re: A simple poll......24MP or 36MP...
4

Saldahna wrote:

with 24 MP the pixels are not that crowded on the same sensor size and that is better for the sharpness of the pictures.

What you're saying is, if I understood you, is that pixels are not crowded on the same size, they have more room to breathe and stretch their legs and that helps sharpness immensely. On the other hand, when you put too many pixels in the same room, they get agitated, they start fighting amongst themselves and all that commotion affects sharpness in a negative way.

Rrrrright..

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 60,885
Re: A simple poll......24MP or 36MP...
4

coudet wrote:

Saldahna wrote:

with 24 MP the pixels are not that crowded on the same sensor size and that is better for the sharpness of the pictures.

What you're saying is, if I understood you, is that pixels are not crowded on the same size, they have more room to breathe and stretch their legs and that helps sharpness immensely. On the other hand, when you put too many pixels in the same room, they get agitated, they start fighting amongst themselves and all that commotion affects sharpness in a negative way.

Rrrrright..

The top of the line Japanese cameras get Wagyu pixels, which are hand massaged to make the image quality even better (and more tender). That's better than even the new Leica M, which just as Holstein pixels.

-- hide signature --

Bob

bobn2
bobn2 Forum Pro • Posts: 60,885
Re: 36mp
1

kayone wrote:

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

More is better!

Greg.

Hardly, not everyone needs that excessive size to choke up storage space & CPU processing cycles when processing RAW files.  And the arguement 'I can always crop it down' is also BS.  Cropping is done out of desire for better composition, NOT as a necessity for handling file size.

The storage space for one frame from my D800 costs less and takes a smaller proportion of my available storage space than did a frame from my old 5D when I bought it.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: 48 mp

Douglas Boyd wrote:

I recently reviewed a bunch of my images made with D800E and Hasselblad H3DII-39.  These were all 20 x 30 inch prints from Costco.  Even at this relatively small size, the Hassey 39mp pictures had a slight edge over the D800E.  Now what I really want is for Sony to release a 48mp chip for either a full-frame Nikon DSLR or Sony DSLT camera.  Actually I would slightly prefer it in the Sony mount because of the superior Sony/Leitz lenses, especially the wonderful Sony 70-400mm lens.  48mp would give approximately the same pixel density as the current 24 mp APS-C cameras (Nex-7, A99, etc), which would be great for telephoto shots.

I really don't understand what you are getting at Douglas... Is it that you think your H3DII had the edge because of the 39 vs. 36mpx? Also what was the lenses in both cameras and what was the Iso shot? I say this because my Imacon 528c on Contax 645 which is only 22mpx when shot in single shot, it destroys D39II at 50 Iso... both with their dedicated 120macro fitted, while it is just better from my D800E at 100Iso for the same width of frame with my 105VR fitted... I just don't find the comparison base in your post... if you are kind to explain... I also don't understand how res was induced into your post and what it relates too.... I mean why do you assume that a 48mp sensor would be any better than a 36 one or a 24 one or a 16 one... A 20x30 inch print can be great (presumed that it is a "perfect" shot) from only 3mp....

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Douglas Boyd
Douglas Boyd Contributing Member • Posts: 587
Re: 48 mp response to Theodoros

Theorodos,

For my test I laid out about 25 20x30 inch (not cm) prints on the living room floor, and selected the best 9 for a charity auction function.  The pictures were taken with either of Sony A900 (24mp), Nikon D800E (36mp), or Hasselblad H3DII-39 (39mp).  I used a variety of lenses but always a top quality lens  at an optimal aperture, and low ISO.  These were landscape prints in which edge-to-edge detail was important. I also used optimal post-processing in Lightroom 4.1 with careful sharpening to the final print size applied. When compared side-by-side the lower resolution prints (24mp) looked blurry compared to the 36mp and 39mp prints.  The Hasselblad had a slight edge over the Nikon D800E, which could have been due to lens, technique, or subject.  However, since I often print at 30x40 or 30x45, I think these differences would be much greater.  in face I observed this on one print that I photostitched two 39mp images to get to about 70mp and printed at 30x60 I usually do not have so many 30x40 prints to compare (they cost about $30 to make), so this finding is only based on the smaller 20x30 prints that I can get from Costco for $8.95 and use either for final mounting, or as test prints, before going to the laser printing on Fuji silver based paper I use for final output.

So far I could not afford the 50mp version of the Hasselblad since those prices are holding up, so I think that a low-cost full-frame Sony or Nikon at 48mp would be a good alternative.  I'm hoping that there will be an announcement by next Feb.

Yes, based on my experience over the past few years, I believe that 48mp will be the best for 30x40 inch print sizes.  80mp would be needed if going even larger.

I find it hard to believe based on my experience, that 3mp could be useful at 20X30.  Even 12mp is a blur at this size.  Maybe these would work in a stand-alone exhibit without nearby actually sharp pictures for comparison.

==Doug

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

Douglas Boyd wrote:

I recently reviewed a bunch of my images made with D800E and Hasselblad H3DII-39.  These were all 20 x 30 inch prints from Costco.  Even at this relatively small size, the Hassey 39mp pictures had a slight edge over the D800E.  Now what I really want is for Sony to release a 48mp chip for either a full-frame Nikon DSLR or Sony DSLT camera.  Actually I would slightly prefer it in the Sony mount because of the superior Sony/Leitz lenses, especially the wonderful Sony 70-400mm lens.  48mp would give approximately the same pixel density as the current 24 mp APS-C cameras (Nex-7, A99, etc), which would be great for telephoto shots.

-- hide signature --

==Doug

I really don't understand what you are getting at Douglas... Is it that you think your H3DII had the edge because of the 39 vs. 36mpx? Also what was the lenses in both cameras and what was the Iso shot? I say this because my Imacon 528c on Contax 645 which is only 22mpx when shot in single shot, it destroys D39II at 50 Iso... both with their dedicated 120macro fitted, while it is just better from my D800E at 100Iso for the same width of frame with my 105VR fitted... I just don't find the comparison base in your post... if you are kind to explain... I also don't understand how res was induced into your post and what it relates too.... I mean why do you assume that a 48mp sensor would be any better than a 36 one or a 24 one or a 16 one... A 20x30 inch print can be great (presumed that it is a "perfect" shot) from only 3mp....

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

-- hide signature --

==Doug

 Douglas Boyd's gear list:Douglas Boyd's gear list
Sony a7R II Sony a6300 Sony a99 II +35 more
bocajrs
bocajrs Senior Member • Posts: 2,404
Re: Wrong question ... it's not either or ... it's both

Easy,..24MP since I have D600 

 bocajrs's gear list:bocajrs's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Samsung Galaxy Note9 +2 more
Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: 48 mp response to Theodoros

Douglas Boyd wrote:


Theorodos,


For my test I laid out about 25 20x30 inch (not cm) prints on the living room floor, and selected the best 9 for a charity auction function.  The pictures were taken with either of Sony A900 (24mp), Nikon D800E (36mp), or Hasselblad H3DII-39 (39mp).  I used a variety of lenses but always a top quality lens  at an optimal aperture, and low ISO.  These were landscape prints in which edge-to-edge detail was important. I also used optimal post-processing in Lightroom 4.1 with careful sharpening to the final print size applied. When compared side-by-side the lower resolution prints (24mp) looked blurry compared to the 36mp and 39mp prints.  The Hasselblad had a slight edge over the Nikon D800E, which could have been due to lens, technique, or subject.  However, since I often print at 30x40 or 30x45, I think these differences would be much greater.  in face I observed this on one print that I photostitched two 39mp images to get to about 70mp and printed at 30x60 I usually do not have so many 30x40 prints to compare (they cost about $30 to make), so this finding is only based on the smaller 20x30 prints that I can get from Costco for $8.95 and use either for final mounting, or as test prints, before going to the laser printing on Fuji silver based paper I use for final output.

So far I could not afford the 50mp version of the Hasselblad since those prices are holding up, so I think that a low-cost full-frame Sony or Nikon at 48mp would be a good alternative.  I'm hoping that there will be an announcement by next Feb.

Yes, based on my experience over the past few years, I believe that 48mp will be the best for 30x40 inch print sizes.  80mp would be needed if going even larger.

I find it hard to believe based on my experience, that 3mp could be useful at 20X30.  Even 12mp is a blur at this size.  Maybe these would work in a stand-alone exhibit without nearby actually sharp pictures for comparison.

==Doug

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

Douglas Boyd wrote:

I recently reviewed a bunch of my images made with D800E and Hasselblad H3DII-39.  These were all 20 x 30 inch prints from Costco.  Even at this relatively small size, the Hassey 39mp pictures had a slight edge over the D800E.  Now what I really want is for Sony to release a 48mp chip for either a full-frame Nikon DSLR or Sony DSLT camera.  Actually I would slightly prefer it in the Sony mount because of the superior Sony/Leitz lenses, especially the wonderful Sony 70-400mm lens.  48mp would give approximately the same pixel density as the current 24 mp APS-C cameras (Nex-7, A99, etc), which would be great for telephoto shots.

I really don't understand what you are getting at Douglas... Is it that you think your H3DII had the edge because of the 39 vs. 36mpx? Also what was the lenses in both cameras and what was the Iso shot? I say this because my Imacon 528c on Contax 645 which is only 22mpx when shot in single shot, it destroys D39II at 50 Iso... both with their dedicated 120macro fitted, while it is just better from my D800E at 100Iso for the same width of frame with my 105VR fitted... I just don't find the comparison base in your post... if you are kind to explain... I also don't understand how res was induced into your post and what it relates too.... I mean why do you assume that a 48mp sensor would be any better than a 36 one or a 24 one or a 16 one... A 20x30 inch print can be great (presumed that it is a "perfect" shot) from only 3mp....

Yet you are mistaken... I think you confuse "large printing" with "quality printing" clearly for the prices you state, the print has been done in other than a pigment plotter... (probably on a large Durst  with chemicals) which have their own "profile mind" and quality... There is no where in the world currently that there is a serious photographic exhibition and the prints are not made on fine art paper for a pigment plotter that bares optimum profile compatibility with the few well calibrated and linearized labs... The costs that you mention are not enough for the business to buy the fine art paper, ...not to add the ink costs or the profit!

I am a pro that does art repro for a living (along with many other photographic services), I do this with my Imacon 528c used in 16x microstep mode with either C645 or FujiGX680... the image that I print in my absolute profile lab is "true color" 528mb 88mpx 16bit which is considered in stills the best possible image in the world (it will make any single shot back inc.IQ 180 look rubbish and is considerably better than Hass 39MS and 50MS when shot in multishot) ...so I know what I am talking about! Res has very little to do with quality printing Doug, there are sensors that will print in 144 dpi much better than other sensors will print at 360dpi for the same size!

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

kayone Regular Member • Posts: 316
Re: 36mp

Tony Beach wrote:

kayone wrote:

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

More is better!

Hardly, not everyone needs that excessive size to choke up storage space & CPU processing cycles when processing RAW files.

Storage is cheap, and the practical differences between 24 MP and 36 MP are not that great.  Want to spare your CPU?  Reduce the file sizes as a first step in Photoshop before doing any editing.  Don't want to do that?  Well there you go then, because most people when given the choice will choose to work on the larger file rather than the smaller one.

The 'storage is cheap' line is a very tired defense.

gonzalu
gonzalu Forum Pro • Posts: 10,392
50MP FX will suit me just fine :-)
 gonzalu's gear list:gonzalu's gear list
Sony RX100 III Nikon D4S Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G +20 more
Rick Knepper
Rick Knepper Forum Pro • Posts: 16,930
24 MP for the real flagship - the D4

antonoat wrote:

Just out of curiosity I'd like to know who would have preferred that Nikon had made it's new flagship cameras(D800/D800E) 24MP rather than 36MP.
for so long they(Nikon) told us they though twelve MP was more than enough.

There are obviously good arguments for both alternatives but I think it would be very interesting to hear what the photographers who use these cameras would prefer.

If you could please just answer 24 or 36, it would be much appreciated and it could be quite informative.

kind regards

tony

But neither Nikon nor Canon could make it happen with the speed targets they had in mind.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy.

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Pentax 645Z Canon EOS 5DS R Fujifilm GFX 50S Pentax smc D FA 645 55mm F2.8 AL (IF) SDM AW Pentax DA645 28-45mm F4.5 +9 more
Leo360 Senior Member • Posts: 1,141
54 mp

Douglas Boyd wrote:

48mp would give approximately the same pixel density as the current 24 mp APS-C cameras (Nex-7, A99, etc), which would be great for telephoto shots.

Actually, assuming 1.5 crop factor and the same pixel density 24mp DX sensor will scale up to 54mp FX one. In a wishful thinking department I am choosing 54MP

Leo

 Leo360's gear list:Leo360's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
Rick Knepper
Rick Knepper Forum Pro • Posts: 16,930
As for the D800, without 36 MP, it'd be an overpriced D600

Just about.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy.

 Rick Knepper's gear list:Rick Knepper's gear list
Pentax 645Z Canon EOS 5DS R Fujifilm GFX 50S Pentax smc D FA 645 55mm F2.8 AL (IF) SDM AW Pentax DA645 28-45mm F4.5 +9 more
Paphios Regular Member • Posts: 395
Re: A simple poll......24MP or 36MP...

The D800E would not work on a 24 mp FF sensor.  Moire would be too much of a problem with the larger pixels.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads