I have not performed exhaustive testing. However, I have shot HHHRES and THRES, and shot HHHRES off a tripod. I can say with certainty that I do get more detail with HHHRES than the standard 20 MP ORF mage, and it's better from a tripod, too. Obviously focus is critical, along with minimization of atmospheric distortions (mirage, wind) and movement in the photo. I use multi-row panos to get the resolution I need, and a 3x3 image with 50 MP HHHFES off of a tripod I get 20K horizontal pixels when I crop slightly, giving me easy 40" x 60" images at 300 dpi. Yes, landscapes in still conditions off of a tripod. I will often carry another body with the Oly 12-40/2.8 (or mount that on my E.M1.III) and use it to determine my desired field of view/focal length and then shoot at twice that focal length (or close to that) with a prime or the 40-150/2.8 Pro set to the specified focal length, and stop down to f/5.6 to f/8 at ISO 200. This gives me a very sharp high res image at large sizes.
I know, the camera is making up pixels, but I find it does a better job than any external software. Honestly, the next step up would be a 100 MP camera... and I can't justify the 5-figure cost of canera and lenses.
Someone has actually tested the pixel shift resolution increase on the OM-1
https://www.optyczne.pl/477.4-Test_aparatu-OM_System_OM-1_Rozdzielczość.html
In tripod mode it produces a resolution inferior to a current 60 megapixels full frame camera
in handheld mode it falls below a 33 megapixel full frame camera
the maximum resolution increase is around 1.6x as if the camera was circa 50 megapixels and in handheld around 38 megapixels if you consider the improvement on its own resolution those are not comparable to full frame resolution because the yield per pixel drops
In conclusion you get a current high resolution camera from sony like the a7cr and this with its 60 megapixels will look better than your tripod hr shot and you can take any shot you like plus it also has pixel shift
The photo will also have more dynamic range off camera too and you will not have restrictions of multi pixel shooting
There are many useful features and benefit of a cropped format but resolution is not one
It's nice to see actual resolution tests from optzczne, thanks for this. It also supports increased resolution in both HHHR and HR. Interesting the OM-1 (single 20MP mode) outperformed the XT4 and a6600 in resolution despite those cameras having more MP.
According to their results, HHHR improved resolution by 38%. HR (pixel shift) improved resolution 63%.
Compared to something like the 60MP Sony bodies, the MTF50 are definitely less but not at all bad when you consider these values are achievable in a $1000 OM5 size body.
A7CR: 5200 lw/ph
OM5 HR: 4400 lw/ph
OM5 HHHR: 3700 lw/ph
A1mkII: 3600 lw/ph
R5II: 3100 lw/ph
A7IV: 3100 lw/ph
OM5 Single: 2900 lw/ph
R6II: 2600 lw/ph
R7: 1800 lw/ph
Of course a lot of this depends on the lens used. For example the A7CR was tested with the 50mm F1.4 GM whereas the A1II was tested with the new 24-70 F2.8 GM II. The R7 was tested with a craptacular STM lens which might explain the low values.
The LW/PH measures are using jpegs and OM systems jpegs are heavily sharpened same applies to the HR shots processed with their software
The results for the Hi Res Shot mode are naturally higher, and quite a bit. Since we used the OM Workspace app, it is worth taking a closer look at the issue of sharpening. Unfortunately, this is applied quite generously, despite setting the appropriate parameter to the lowest available value. This is proven by the graphs from Imatest, which we present below (for the 50 and 80 Mpix modes, respectively).
Eliminate that effect and you are comparing to full frame camera far away from the 80 and 50 megapixels of the shots and remember those sony cameras at 50 60 megapixels also have pixel shift but present a more modest resolution increase of 13-15% which confirms this feature is not really going to change the life of anyone
If you want a high resolution camera you need to buy one and you will have that benefit in any shots you take including moving ones.
Every JPG I use has sharpening so I don't see how I could eliminate that effect. It is always part of the end product. The other cameras are using JPG's too for these tests.
But as you can see when they turn the sharpening to the lowest setting which is their default there is nothing less
OM system like olympus has aggressive sharpening even at the lowest setting as shown by the MTF curves
I have no issue with Oly JPG sharpening in SR, HR or HHHR as it is what I use most - straight out of camera. Really nice balance of sharpness and noise in my opinion. Every camera maker bakes in some sharpening with JPG. The HR and HHHR raw files have little to no sharpening and there are many threads in these forums about how best to approach sharpening them.
Optzczne cites an 11% increase in Sony's 4-shot method and a 33% increase in the 16 shot method so even high res sensors will benefit from pixel shift. The problem with Sony's implementation is it can't do it in camera, which is a deal breaker for me. Panasonic and Olympus have a huge advantage here although Panasonic has some other quirky limitations.
Back to my shots above. The 20MP cameras with pixel shift won't quite hold up to my 100MP X2D but then for 1/8 the price I can live with it. :-D
For landscapes I use the OM1 (or OM3) with HR and HHHR more than my 50MP A1, 60MP SL3, 60MP M11 or 100MP X2D.
Incidentally, Hasselblad finally added 4-shot pixel shift to the X2D via FW update but it requires it to be tethered to a computer running Phocus :-|
The point is there are many situations where a single shot is jsut the best thing you can do because there are external factors. Let alone the fact it takes time to take multiple shots
20 megapixels are not an issue in camera try assembling 50 60 is a bit different though panasonic can do 45 easily and really sony implementation is pathetic
In real terms with a very sharp lens there is abundance of resolution with a full frame camera more than you need without having to do anything special, of course other than having a good lens
They are using OMW to convert the raws. That is not a requirement of course. ACR and every major raw converter will give you an unsharpened image if that is desired. That said, the JPG's out of camera with (-1 sharpen) applied to HR and HHHR files look excellent. Nothing aggressive about it.
You're right, sometimes a single shot is the best you can do because of external factors. At the very least you still get a 20MP still frame which as we can see offers good resolution.
A1mkII: 3600 lw/ph
R5II: 3100 lw/ph
A7IV: 3100 lw/ph
OM5 Single: 2900 lw/ph
R6II: 2600 lw/ph
R7: 1800 lw/ph
For landscape, seascape, architecture, urban scenes, still life, product photography, macro, archiving, real estate, and long exposure scenes, HR and HHHR are quite nice!
The S1R and SL2 were assembling 47MP into 187MP pixel shift images with motion correction,
in camera back in 2019 so I don't see size as a barrier. Agree Sony's implementation is poor.
In real terms resolution depends on a host of factors and every shooter and situation will yield various results. All that is necessary is to reach the point of sufficient for the photographs intended use. Given the vast majority of photographs shared around the world every second have significantly less resolution than the products we are discussing here, I think we are spoiled by the options available.
particularly as I prefer 4:3 ratio.
