What size print from 6mp sensor

Hi

Having just updated my camera gear and found that no dealer was willing to take my old EOS 300d(rebel) in part ex so I decided to keep it as a carry about in my car together with a Sigma 18-200mm lens. I bought it new in 2004 but hardly used it as I went back to film so the shutter count is very low. My question is:

What size print can I get out of this camera

Any other information would be appreciated.

dbmodernimage wrote:

Hi

Having just updated my camera gear and found that no dealer was willing to take my old EOS 300d(rebel) in part ex so I decided to keep it as a carry about in my car together with a Sigma 18-200mm lens. I bought it new in 2004 but hardly used it as I went back to film so the shutter count is very low. My question is:

What size print can I get out of this camera

Any other information would be appreciated.

At 300 PPI (considered photo quality), you can do 8"x10".

See:

http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php

When I first got my 5D, I did a comparison with the 300D.  I used a good lens, tripod mounted  under noce sunny conditions.  I printed both at 12x18.  You have to look hard to tell the difference.  I nave done other 12x18 inch prints from my 300D and they are excellent.

As others have noted, with a decent 6MP image, you can get an acceptable 12x18 print. But, if you're using a loupe to compare it with a print from a much higher resolution camera, you might see a difference.

That said, the lens may have a greater impact on your picture quality than the camera. The older super-zooms would start to show their weaknesses clearly even at 6MP.

Print size calculations assume that you have to be able to see full detail all the way from the tip of your nose (300 DPI) to viewing the full frame.

In truth, that's rarely the case.

We have a mix 9 of 12x12 prints. Some from our 300D, some are actually HDRs from a G9, and some from a 500D. If I look closely, I can tell which came from the higher resolution camera (I know which cam made each), but nobody else can (my wife will nod and agree if I point it out, but what does that mean?), nor does it have any real effect on the visual impact of the photos.

In other words, you can really print any size you want from a 300D.

I will advise you to shoot RAW with it and invest in DxO Optics pro or another good RAW processor to make the most of what it puts out. That will make a big difference. JPEG processing has come a long way since 2003.

It depends on the subject. People pics larger since fine detail isn't as important as in a detailed landscape shot. I've made quite good 12"x18" people pic prints from a 4MP Canon G2 (shot RAW and processed carefully).

What is wrong with the lens you have now?  Having said this, the lens the got the most use on my old 300D was the 28-105 f3.5-4.5.  You might also try the Tamron 28-75 f2.8.  I liked both, but sold them.  Note that neither covers wide angle.

However, I would try the lens you have now before deciding it is no good.

dbmodernimage wrote:

Jim Cassatt wrote:

When I first got my 5D, I did a comparison with the 300D. I used a good lens, tripod mounted under noce sunny conditions. I printed both at 12x18. You have to look hard to tell the difference. I nave done other 12x18 inch prints from my 300D and they are excellent.

The EF 40mm f/2.8 STM ($150 new) is a great lens to pair with an older Rebel to use as go anywhere camera.

I have one on my XTi and keep the camera with the lens on inside a $12.50 AmazonBasics Case. There is also room for spare batteries, and memory card in outside pockets.

Shorthand wrote:

Print size calculations assume that you have to be able to see full detail all the way from the tip of your nose (300 DPI) to viewing the full frame.

In truth, that's rarely the case.

We have a mix 9 of 12x12 prints. Some from our 300D, some are actually HDRs from a G9, and some from a 500D. If I look closely, I can tell which came from the higher resolution camera (I know which cam made each), but nobody else can (my wife will nod and agree if I point it out, but what does that mean?), nor does it have any real effect on the visual impact of the photos.

In other words, you can really print any size you want from a 300D.

I will advise you to shoot RAW with it and invest in DxO Optics pro or another good RAW processor to make the most of what it puts out. That will make a big difference. JPEG processing has come a long way since 2003.

Canon Digital Photo Professional is free, it includes all the updated JPG conversion, noise reduction, and even Canon's latest Digital Lens Optimizer.

Just download the update to the latest version from the Canon website. If you can't locate your original disk, just go to the T5i software and download the whole disk there. (doing this also gives you support for lenses like the 18-55 IS).

dbmodernimage wrote:

I do still have the box c/w the software discs and printed manuals.

I must have bought the camera new in 2004/5 when Canon were giving away a free 256mb card! I never really used the camera much as other things got in the way of my photography so the camera sat in its case in the wardrobe. It was only early last year that things settled down and I got back into photography buying a m43 system. When I offered the 300d as part ex I was told that it was too old to trade although it had way less than 1000 shutter actuations. This is when I decided to keep it in my works car as I travel between sites and often see photo opportunities. I have paired it up with a cheap secondhand (very little used) Sigma 18-200. The Sigma is probably not the sharpest but the lower resolution of the 300d might not show them up at smaller print sizes. My questions were really how big can the 300d be printed to with a decent lens and what lens is worth tracking down second hand(on a tight budget) I felt the 300d would be better than buying a cheap point and shoot camera.

I have LR4 on my laptop and use that for image processing

I agree the 300D is better than a cheap point and shoot.

This picture was taken with my XTi/400D heavily cropped down to 5 megapixels, and then up-rezed from 5 megapixels to 10 megapixels (as an example of what you can do).

As I already mentioned I think the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM is a great lens. What I like about it, is it allows the camera pack into a very small bag.

The above photo was taken with a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 also a very sharp lens, but, slow to focus in low light.

I'm not too familiar with the Sigma lens you have, though I do have a number of Sigma zooms myself.

It's easy to see for yourself what you gen get from your present camera and lens. Take a good example image and have it printed 12"x18" and see what you get. If you want larger, try that.

dbmodernimage wrote:

My questions were really how big can the 300d be printed to with a decent lens