Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6      
7
       8       end
  

Archive 2011 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors
  
 
ragebot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #1 · p.7 #1 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Sharona wrote:
SNIP
Thank you for answering my question. I can see how large art prints would benefit from more megapixels, I just wonder how many is enough and when does it become too many? Not to encourage more arguing here, though.....


Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP







Given that it was cropped from this image, which was shot at 800mm using a Sigma 300-800









Dec 08, 2011 at 05:00 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #2 · p.7 #2 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


I don't know - because I didn't read it - what previous discussion might have led to this question, so my reply is simply based on observing the photograph. The question was: "Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP?"

Some thoughts:

1. Since there are already - as we would expect with this subject - some slight motion blur issues, for presentation on a computer screen at this size, there would be little or no advantage to more MP - the primary limiting factors for this subject when you crop so radically are going to be lens resolution and camera/subject motion.

2. That said, I immediately saw pixelation in the image when I looked at some of the diagonal edges in the image. I know from experience that if you wanted to print this photograph that a) the results of a print at this size would be less satisfactory than the results of displaying it on a monitor and b) the overall image quality would likely be less sharp than you would want.

3. I also notice the sharpening artifacts around the edges. To some extent this is also a function of the size of pixels relative to the final image size.

Dan

ragebot wrote:
Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP

http://www.pbase.com/tommy2guns/image/63574755/original.jpg

Given that it was cropped from this image, which was shot at 800mm using a Sigma 300-800

http://www.pbase.com/tommy2guns/image/63497887/original.jpg




Dec 08, 2011 at 05:27 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #3 · p.7 #3 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Sharona wrote:
Thank you for answering my question. I can see how large art prints would benefit from more megapixels, I just wonder how many is enough and when does it become too many? Not to encourage more arguing here, though.....

Different folks have different opinions about when more megapixels will stop bringing resolution benefits. In theory there are some people who claim from various calculations that we may be able to go as high as 120 megapixles and still see resolution improvements. Again that's a theoretical limit, and a real world limit could be quite lower.

To look at it another way (theoretically again), an 18mp crop sensor (such as the one currently used in the 7D) if retaining the same pixel density on a full frame sensor would be something like 46mp (if I recall the result of the calculations correctly).

But in pratical terms, as more megapixels on the sensor start to impose more compromises on the camrea, how many is 'too many' will depend on the individual photorapher and what their needs are. For some 12mp is plenty. For some 21mp is not enough. That's the beauty of having different camera models. If Canon comes out with a 36mp camera and you think that's too many megapixels for you, no one if going to force you to buy it. It's not like they're going to stop making other cameras and you can always buy a different model with fewer megapixels.

Of course, when 10 megapixel cameras came out, I remember people on camera forums griping about how that was too many and 6 megapixels was enough for them. When the next generation of higher megapixel cameras came out people were saying that 10mp was enough for them and 12 or 15 or whatever was too much. Heck, people in the alt forums right now are wringing their hands over the NEX-7 having too many pixels and wishing that it had fewer pixels like the NEX-5N because of "more noise" when in fact it's been shown in side by side examples that the difference in noise is completely trivial up to ISO800 (and if you downsample the 7 files to the size of the 5n files most of the difference at very high ISOs disappears as well).

Point is, we may be approaching a point of diminishing returns on higher megapixels, but that doesn't mean we've hit the wall just yet.



Dec 08, 2011 at 05:47 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #4 · p.7 #4 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


ragebot wrote:
Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP

Yes.



Dec 08, 2011 at 05:52 PM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #5 · p.7 #5 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


ragebot wrote:
Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP



Not likely at all. Resolvable detail of action shots that distant is almost always limited by target/lens relative motion blur as well as AF inaccuracies. Then, the lens resolution comes into play including light on the target and exposure. The very last in significance would be the camera resolution.



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:14 PM
splathrop
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #6 · p.7 #6 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


ragebot? The ragebot?

Small world.

Just to add a bit more to the resolution equation: The sense of insufficient resolution comes into play when an enlargement disappoints the eye's expectation for detail. That means that in addition to the issues mentioned above, subject matter can be critical, and good lens contrast can make a surprisingly large difference.

A subject with inherently high detail, like the texture of bristle cone pine tree bark, requires all the resolution you can bring. On the other hand, a facial portrait can get past the eye's expectation for detail at relatively low resolution, so you don't need as much for that.

And for any subject, a lens that can bring out the subtlest shadings provides what amounts to a practical resolution bonus. Excellent subtle shadings, because they add detail, notably increase enlargeability, even with resolution held constant.

Stephen Lathrop



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:32 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #7 · p.7 #7 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


ragebot wrote:
Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP

http://www.pbase.com/tommy2guns/image/63574755/original.jpg

Given that it was cropped from this image, which was shot at 800mm using a Sigma 300-800

http://www.pbase.com/tommy2guns/image/63497887/original.jpg


absolutely, even if there is some motion it looks clearly bright enough conditions that you could've bumped up shutter speed and even if the AF missed a trace on this one it surely should've gotten some surrounding frame sharp, this is really a pretty easy condition, lots of light and clean background (although bright white and lots of sun sometimes seems to overload Canon AF on some bodies so....)

but something like that a 10D vs a 7D
a 5D vs a 5D2 vs a mythical 36MP D800
the higher MP in each case would quite clearly have helped it I believe

it's possible that the sigma is very, very soft at 800mm so it's hard to say what differential in MP you'd need to grab a nicely useful extra amount of detail and at what point the returns would be not enough to bother about but I don't think the current cameras are there yet even for that lens by any means even if you didn't get quite the truly maxed detail as from an 800L



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:40 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #8 · p.7 #8 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Ralph Conway wrote:
upon your reaction I think it worked well. If you do not do sports but portraits a 10 FPS will not give you a beter picture than a singleshot does.


unless the key moment lasted only a second and part of that had an awkward blink, etc.

even shooting a speaker, you'd be surprised how tricky some people are, always blinking like mad and doing weird motions with their faces

of if you are doing an action model sequence shooting during constant moving poses

now certainly enough one shot and enough careful one shot can get good pics there and in some cases better but sometimes the fps can help too



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:42 PM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #9 · p.7 #9 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


I find high resolution most helpful in situations where I couldn't predict exactly in advance what I will be using the image for. For example, when I am shooting portraits to be made into single prints yes I can frame fairly exactly. However, if I subsequently want to make a composite display image from lots of different images I may well what to crop these images quite dramatically on occasion to make an interesting "mosaic". In such situations a high resolution sensor is a godsend. Incidentally I also find my 7D offers remarkably detailed images for this purpose, not as detailed as the 5D2, but still impressive.

If my lenses can supply high resolution images then ideally I want a sensor that can capture all of the information I have paid for. How much mpx is enough? Don't know, but its certainly more than 18 mpx on full frame.



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:49 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #10 · p.7 #10 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Ralph Conway wrote:
When I read people calling for 36MP to get crop freedom, I have to laugh. Itīs like asking for a Porsche at 300 mph to drive 180. There is a cause, why there is a viefinder in a DSLR: To find the optimal view. If you do not do it, of course a 70% Crop can make the image. But that is not what gear is made for, right?

5D MK II ist the best available (and afordable) camera imo up to date. So what is wrong in using it and beeing happy?

Ralph


What if you have no 800mm lens and the subject is far off?
What if 3:2 simply doesn't work best for the composition, in that even if you have a zoom of the right focal lengths you still might need to crop more than 5%.

And some nature scenes have extremely complex textures that simply look a lot cooler if you can zoom in all the way on a computer or by close approach to a high PPI print. Heck, some outdoor photo magazines used to automatically reject virtually all 35mm landscape shots for double page spreads and some even for single page, if what I've read is correct (although their might have been a bit of snobbery going on of course).



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:49 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #11 · p.7 #11 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


David Baldwin wrote:
I find high resolution most helpful in situations where I couldn't predict exactly in advance what I will be using the image for. For example, when I am shooting portraits to be made into single prints yes I can frame fairly exactly. However, if I subsequently want to make a composite display image from lots of different images I may well what to crop these images quite dramatically on occasion to make an interesting "mosaic". In such situations a high resolution sensor is a godsend. Incidentally I also find my 7D offers remarkably detailed images for this purpose, not
...Show more

good point too, sometimes I end up liking both a wide take it all in and also various tight crops into a photo, be it landscape or sports or whatnot

in some cases they could've been separate shots and often that is what is done but sometimes you don't realize until later, so why not let it give you some bonus compositions, why must one be punished for not always seeing everything on the spot and sometimes things move around and it's not possible no matter how fully your eye saw everything instantly on the spot



Dec 08, 2011 at 06:55 PM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #12 · p.7 #12 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


"5D MK II ist the best available (and afordable) camera imo up to date. So what is wrong in using it and beeing happy?"

Nothing wrong at all. But that doesn't mean we can't expect the 5D3 to be even better! And seeing how good the 7D is, I can't help but wonder what a wonderful camera we would have if we could cross a 5D2 with a 7D. I think Canon can do this, whether they want to or not is a different question.

A full frame body with the 7Ds AF and sensor pixel pitch would be probably eclipse most every DSLR available today. Don't know how much it would cost though, but dreaming is free!

In the meantime the 5D2 gives wonderful IQ, and at a relatively affordable price.

Edited on Dec 08, 2011 at 07:03 PM · View previous versions



Dec 08, 2011 at 07:00 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #13 · p.7 #13 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Best available ? C'mon

David Baldwin wrote:
"5D MK II ist the best available (and afordable) camera imo up to date. So what is wrong in using it and beeing happy?"




Dec 08, 2011 at 07:03 PM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #14 · p.7 #14 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


eh, kewlcanon, I didn't say that. I was quoting someone else. Mind you the only DSLR with better IQ than the 5D2 is a Nikon at 3x the price so I have alot of sympathy with Ralph's viewpoint.


Dec 08, 2011 at 07:05 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #15 · p.7 #15 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


I'm aware it wasn't you....I'm looking for allround features .

David Baldwin wrote:
eh, kewlcanon, I didn't say that. I was quoting someone else. Mind you the only DSLR with better IQ than the 5D2 is a Nikon at 3x the price so I have alot of sympathy with Ralph's viewpoint.




Dec 08, 2011 at 07:07 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #16 · p.7 #16 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


David Baldwin wrote:
"5D MK II ist the best available (and afordable) camera imo up to date. So what is wrong in using it and beeing happy?"

Nothing wrong at all. But that doesn't mean we can't expect the 5D3 to be even better! And seeing how good the 7D is, I can't help but wonder what a wonderful camera we would have if we could cross a 5D2 with a 7D. I think Canon can do this, whether they want to or not is a different question.

A full frame body with the 7Ds AF and sensor pixel pitch would be probably eclipse
...Show more

and yes none of this means that we don't fully enjoy using the 5D2 now!

this is just chat about what comes next and if you say forget that sort of thinking and always think onyl about what exists well then we'd still be using not even the D30 but not even taking photos at all



Dec 08, 2011 at 07:08 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #17 · p.7 #17 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


David Baldwin wrote:
If my lenses can supply high resolution images then ideally I want a sensor that can capture all of the information I have paid for.


+1

For this reason and some slightly more complex things based on how lenses work, I would rather have a sensor that outresolves my lenses, than lenses that outresolve my sensor. (By the way, the two cannot have equal resolution.)

Dan



Dec 08, 2011 at 09:13 PM
Pixel Perfect
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #18 · p.7 #18 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


artd wrote:
Yes.


Only if the technique were spot but if in this case we could magically replace the sensor with a higher resolution one keeping every thing else the same, I doubt we see much improvement. It may look worse.
I find I need to use higher shutters speeds on the 7D than 1D III to attain critical sharpness and this is nit just related to smaller crop factor.



Dec 08, 2011 at 09:36 PM
artd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #19 · p.7 #19 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


Pixel Perfect wrote:
Only if the technique were spot but if in this case we could magically replace the sensor with a higher resolution one keeping every thing else the same, I doubt we see much improvement. It may look worse.
I find I need to use higher shutters speeds on the 7D than 1D III to attain critical sharpness and this is nit just related to smaller crop factor.


It would not likely make the picture sharper. But it would would minimize the halos currently present and minimize the pixelation which is readily apparent. Those in my book would be big benefits.



Dec 08, 2011 at 10:05 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #20 · p.7 #20 · New 5D Mark 3 Rumors


ragebot wrote:
Do you think this pix would benefit from more MP



Many interesting answers so far.

First I want to mention that I want higher resolution cameras, with the current sensor technology something in the range between 40 and 60 MP would make sense to me.

In this particular example, I have to say no, I don't think it would benefit much from more pixels. It is based on what I see, there is quite heavy sharpening applied, with strong sharpening halos, more than 1 pixel wide. Yet the detail is not sharp at pixel level. This suggests to me that the focus is ever so slightly off. It could also be a small amount of motion blur, but my guess is that the dominant limiting factor here is focus error.

IMO, different processing with interpolation of the unsharpened image, and then careful output sharpening, would not be significantly worse than an image with more pixels.



Dec 08, 2011 at 10:13 PM
1       2       3              6      
7
       8       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6      
7
       8       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password