a7r4 compared to 24mp aps-c, base iso100, final.

[Advent1sam]

At 100% zoom, the left side images blow away the right side, not even close.

For example, I can clearly make out what the fine prints say in the second row on the left but not on the right.

JMHO, you may see things differently.

It is not even close I own a a6500 and have a a6600 coming but I do not use them for image quality or critical things just for convenience.

I did preorder the two new lenses 16-55 G & 70-350 G because they appear to be good but only as a small rig when I go somewhere for the weekend.

The idea of walking around and having everything from 24mm to 525mm FF equivalent with one of these lenses in my cargo shorts is pretty appealing.

It is hard to back away from my a7rIV and GM's but for what I intend to use them for they should be fine. Not a critical intense what is the best I can get but hopefully good enough and convenient.

 

[drip01]

At 100% zoom, the left side images blow away the right side, not even close.

For example, I can clearly make out what the fine prints say in the second row on the left but not on the right.

JMHO, you may see things differently.

It is not even close I own a a6500 and have a a6600 coming but I do not use them for image quality or critical things just for convenience.

I did preorder the two new lenses 16-55 G & 70-350 G because they appear to be good but only as a small rig when I go somewhere for the weekend.

The idea of walking around and having everything from 24mm to 525mm FF equivalent with one of these lenses in my cargo shorts is pretty appealing.

It is hard to back away from my a7rIV and GM's but for what I intend to use them for they should be fine. Not a critical intense what is the best I can get but hopefully good enough and convenient.

74mp is stretch for 24mp for such a comparison when you apply the same ai base tool, ie Enhance Details to a7r4 and then gigapixel as well, so what you are seeing/saying is the process works well. As I mentioned somewhere else it’s unlikely people will apply either to a 60mp sensor, so if you compare the original results, that is closer, much! If you want to try and take two equivalent images with your a7r4 and a6500, preferably the same lens but equivalent aperture/focal length I would be happy to process them so can see the difference of a real world image, like this, here are the links to the GFX50 and xpro2 for your own comparison.

https://3.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/62719834/fae41535a8f4449685155ac75c7e3a77

https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/62719834/e2e9c3c23c2747e1b3c780a59e8eb47d

I just want to point out I do see some major differences in fine details between the two. That's all. I won't comment any more.

--
Brian

 

[Advent1sam]

At 100% zoom, the left side images blow away the right side, not even close.

For example, I can clearly make out what the fine prints say in the second row on the left but not on the right.

JMHO, you may see things differently.

It is not even close I own a a6500 and have a a6600 coming but I do not use them for image quality or critical things just for convenience.

I did preorder the two new lenses 16-55 G & 70-350 G because they appear to be good but only as a small rig when I go somewhere for the weekend.

The idea of walking around and having everything from 24mm to 525mm FF equivalent with one of these lenses in my cargo shorts is pretty appealing.

It is hard to back away from my a7rIV and GM's but for what I intend to use them for they should be fine. Not a critical intense what is the best I can get but hopefully good enough and convenient.

74mp is stretch for 24mp for such a comparison when you apply the same ai base tool, ie Enhance Details to a7r4 and then gigapixel as well, so what you are seeing/saying is the process works well. As I mentioned somewhere else it’s unlikely people will apply either to a 60mp sensor, so if you compare the original results, that is closer, much! If you want to try and take two equivalent images with your a7r4 and a6500, preferably the same lens but equivalent aperture/focal length I would be happy to process them so can see the difference of a real world image, like this, here are the links to the GFX50 and xpro2 for your own comparison.

https://3.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/62719834/fae41535a8f4449685155ac75c7e3a77

https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/62719834/e2e9c3c23c2747e1b3c780a59e8eb47d

I just want to point out I do see some major differences in fine details between the two. That's all. I won't comment any more.

There are obvious differences in focus point, 1 seems further back, also, note x-pro2 is xtrans vs bayer, xtrans has other issues to deal with!

Hey, if you'd rather carry FF/MF, or anything else for that matter, go ahead, don't let me stop you in your pursuit of perfection

 

[sybersitizen]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

 

[snapa]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

I agree with you sybersitizen, enough is enough with this confirmation bias Advent has with his a6500.

Advent1sam... please wait until you get the a6600 and all the best lenses ever made for it, then tell us all why you think the a6600 is much better than the a6500. How many time do we all need to hear how much better the a6500 is than any other E-mount camera ever made. :-(

I'm glad you love your camera so much, but why tell us all so many times every day that it is the best APS-C camera ever made? Even better than any FF Sony have ever made because you can increase the MP's so much. Even those posts have proved that the latest Sony FF cameras have better looking high resolution pictures and IQ. Not everyone is interested in printing 60 x 50 inch pictures.

--
Life is short, so make the best of it while you can!
http://grob.smugmug.com/
https://grob.smugmug.com/Wildlife-Pictures/

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too, if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

 

[GaryW]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people?

Well, if I can be pedantic, a cellphone is going to be the best camera for the majority of people.

By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

If we didn't post opinions, this forum would be even less interesting (and active) than it already is. Or something. ;-)

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too, if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

I think you're hinting at another point with your mentioning of MF. The whole term "full frame" is misleading. There's nothing "full" about it. It's just another arbitrary size. What size do you want? Larger is better, all else being equal. However, when you have an APS-C camera that performs as good as FF cameras from a few years ago, that's not a bad place to be.

If you really need more MP, though, it's not hard to leverage computational photographic techniques, such as panoramas or super-resolution. So, you can work harder to squeeze more out of your camera. It's not such a bad compromise.

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people?

Well, if I can be pedantic, a cellphone is going to be the best camera for the majority of people.

By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

If we didn't post opinions, this forum would be even less interesting (and active) than it already is. Or something. ;-)

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too, if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

I think you're hinting at another point with your mentioning of MF. The whole term "full frame" is misleading. There's nothing "full" about it. It's just another arbitrary size. What size do you want? Larger is better, all else being equal. However, when you have an APS-C camera that performs as good as FF cameras from a few years ago, that's not a bad place to be.

We are in total agreement, the capability of these aps-c cameras outperforms our skill by huge margins, the dr/color fidelity and now the new lenses is a real boost for Sony e, not sure where all the negativity is coming from, peace and love

If you really need more MP, though, it's not hard to leverage computational photographic techniques, such as panoramas or super-resolution. So, you can work harder to squeeze more out of your camera. It's not such a bad compromise.

Spot-on Gary, nicely put, 100% on the same page

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

I agree with you sybersitizen, enough is enough with this confirmation bias Advent has with his a6500.

Advent1sam... please wait until you get the a6600 and all the best lenses ever made for it, then tell us all why you think the a6600 is much better than the a6500. How many time do we all need to hear how much better the a6500 is than any other E-mount camera ever made. :-(

I'm glad you love your camera so much, but why tell us all so many times every day that it is the best APS-C camera ever made? Even better than any FF Sony have ever made because you can increase the MP's so much. Even those posts have proved that the latest Sony FF cameras have better looking high resolution pictures and IQ. Not everyone is interested in printing 60 x 50 inch pictures.

Peace and love, keep on rockin, in the free world!

 

[GaryW]

At 100% zoom, the left side images blow away the right side, not even close.

For example, I can clearly make out what the fine prints say in the second row on the left but not on the right.

JMHO, you may see things differently.

I just see differences, good/bad are you on a 2k or 4k and viewing in the browser.

I don't think my monitor or browser would selective blur out the right side images and keep the left side clear. Big differences to me as a bird shooter. Feather details are important.

If you are referring to the text swatch I can clearly read on both,

I can see the text on both, which is amazing, but it's far more clear on the left. It's barely legible on the right. This is a clear win for the A7R4, but given the levels of magnification, I think it's going to be more fair to say it's more subtle than huge. Even printing poster-size, I would think it'd be extremely difficult if not impossible to tell the difference.

Also, look at the test targets. The semi-circles are more blurred on the a6500 side. There's a clear loss of resolution. The only question left is, does it matter?

Tony Northrup says yes.

faces seem similar for me, remember these are colossal size now, you can print to a billboard with these size images.

Yeah, when you're talking about this amount of magnification, it's kind of silly.

Last few rows of text in the second image. Not close to me. As I said, you may see things differently because you love your a6500 so much.

Do this comparison again with phone images, I bet you'd come up with the same conclusions that they are close (when reduced in size).

Why would you reduce them?

I recently looked at the DPR comparison tool and threw in one of my P&S cameras into the mix, and it was really bad compared to the other cameras! (6500, a7r4, etc.) Yikes. That is what I call a huge difference. This difference that Sam shows is pretty minor, particularly considering the levels of magnification we're talking about.

 

[sybersitizen]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

 

[terryreid]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Click ignore on this clown I just did

 

[sybersitizen]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people?

Well, if I can be pedantic, a cellphone is going to be the best camera for the majority of people.

You might want to express that opinion once, maybe twice. Why would you make three separate threads about that, conducting 'tests' that you (incorrectly) imagine justify your opinion being appropriate for others? Why would you think people care about your - or anyone's - pedantry?

By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

If we didn't post opinions, this forum would be even less interesting (and active) than it already is. Or something. ;-)

One opinion thread, okay, Two opinion threads on the same thing - pushing it. Three opinion threads on the same thing - too much.

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

Man, you are angry, chill!

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Click ignore on this clown I just did

That's not very polite, lol.

 

[sybersitizen]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

Man, you are angry, chill!

Oh, I'm being much nicer to you than you deserve. For one thing, I have to keep reminding you of what I've actually written in these threads, which is irritating. You haven't seen me angry.

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

Man, you are angry, chill!

Oh, I'm being much nicer to you than you deserve.

No, you are a rude arrogant guy, you deserve less time than I'm giving you!

For one thing, I have to keep reminding you of what I've actually written in these threads, which is irritating. You haven't seen me angry.

I'm happy to test you, you seem old and outdated, your comments are from someone with a closed mentality, why aren't you on FF, wouldn't that suit you better, aps-c 24mp obviously is not enough for you?

 

[sybersitizen]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

Man, you are angry, chill!

Oh, I'm being much nicer to you than you deserve.

No, you are a rude arrogant guy, you deserve less time than I'm giving you!

For one thing, I have to keep reminding you of what I've actually written in these threads, which is irritating. You haven't seen me angry.

I'm happy to test you

Fine, let's go there.

you seem old and outdated

You seem young and stupid.

your comments are from someone with a closed mentality

I think you're talking about yourself.

why aren't you on FF, wouldn't that suit you better, aps-c 24mp obviously is not enough for you?

Ah, there we go ... you're either stupid, or uninterested in actually reading and understanding what you see, or both. I already posted this, but of course you have no clue that it happened:

"Everyone is welcome to answer the simple question How many pixels is enough? based on his own situation. I personally own no camera with higher resolution than 24MP, and most of the time I use cameras with lower resolution than that. They are 'enough'."

Are you beginning to understand what's wrong with you?

 

[Advent1sam]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

Man, you are angry, chill!

Oh, I'm being much nicer to you than you deserve.

No, you are a rude arrogant guy, you deserve less time than I'm giving you!

For one thing, I have to keep reminding you of what I've actually written in these threads, which is irritating. You haven't seen me angry.

I'm happy to test you

Fine, let's go there.

you seem old and outdated

You seem young and stupid.

your comments are from someone with a closed mentality

I think you're talking about yourself.

why aren't you on FF, wouldn't that suit you better, aps-c 24mp obviously is not enough for you?

Ah, there we go ... you're either stupid, or uninterested in actually reading and understanding what you see, or both. I already posted this, but of course you have no clue that it happened:

"Everyone is welcome to answer the simple question How many pixels is enough? based on his own situation. I personally own no camera with higher resolution than 24MP, and most of the time I use cameras with lower resolution than that. They are 'enough'."

Are you beginning to understand what's wrong with you?

I know what is wrong with you, yes.

 

[sybersitizen]

... I am fully sold on aps-c, have been since digital DSLR, FF is unnecessary for the majority of people imo

When will you figure out that nobody cares about your opinion about what is unnecessary for the majority of people? By all means, decide for yourself what's good enough and what's practical enough and what's economical enough for you and leave others out of it.

All these tests of yours have done a spectacular job of confirming that more resolution is objectively better at recording detail than less resolution, so they have indeed served a purpose. Time to let the subjective opinionizing go now, hmm?

Wow, you need to relax a little and stop opining about my opinion's and provide something constructive too,

I've provided plenty of constructive input with facts explaining that hardware resolution advantages are real, while pointing out that you offer nothing but opinions about what is enough and what should be enough for other people.

if you don't like ai, cool, walk on by...

I have never said or implied such a thing in any of my posts in your three different threads on this subject. What I have said repeatedly is that AI can be applicable to every image, so poorer hardware resolution can never catch up to better hardware resolution despite AI.

Like I say, if others want to carry an a7r4/3/2/1 or any other MF/FF or aps-c or m43, that's entirely your/their prerogative. I stand by my conclusion, if you don't or others don't cool, I am trying to help people not hold them back, the results from 24mp are ostensibly the same in print from any aps-c,FF,MF, the difference is just framing/skill/lens/opportunity........

You've made your point about your opinion in three threads now. How many do you think it takes to make the point that you personally are happy with your 24MP APS-C camera's resolution? I see the word final in the title of this one, so I hope that is the answer.

Man, you are angry, chill!

Oh, I'm being much nicer to you than you deserve.

No, you are a rude arrogant guy, you deserve less time than I'm giving you!

For one thing, I have to keep reminding you of what I've actually written in these threads, which is irritating. You haven't seen me angry.

I'm happy to test you

Fine, let's go there.

you seem old and outdated

You seem young and stupid.

your comments are from someone with a closed mentality

I think you're talking about yourself.

why aren't you on FF, wouldn't that suit you better, aps-c 24mp obviously is not enough for you?

Ah, there we go ... you're either stupid, or uninterested in actually reading and understanding what you see, or both. I already posted this, but of course you have no clue that it happened:

"Everyone is welcome to answer the simple question How many pixels is enough? based on his own situation. I personally own no camera with higher resolution than 24MP, and most of the time I use cameras with lower resolution than that. They are 'enough'."

Are you beginning to understand what's wrong with you?

I know what is wrong with you, yes.

Another stupid reply that shows your inability to read, comprehend, and respond.