Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  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       4       end
  

Archive 2014 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....

  
 
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


I was just reading a thread over on the Nikon board about the choice between a D3x and D800E and a very good reply by Steve Perry got me to thinking about all this high MP discussion that is everywhere these days since 2012 and the D800 introduction.

Most of the time it is the landscape shooters that seem to be really clambering for the high MPs in most of the threads about this. They always want to print big and want every available MP.

However, I started thinking about the differences between landscape shooting on a tripod and perfect latitude to frame most shots exactly how you want them to make use of the full image circle/sensor. Then I was thinking about my type of shooting of Wildlife and Birds. In that type of shooting we almost always have to crop and I often present images on the N&W board that are very close to 100% crops without anyone even knowing.

So I was thinking that it should actually be the Bird and Wildlife shooters that crop like crazy that should be the ones clambering for more MPs and that actually the Landscape shooters would maybe even be happy with FF 16-24MP range as they can usually fill the frame with their image and would still be able to print up to 24x36 or even greater from those resolutions.

I realize that DR is a whole different issue and then the D800 would be very valuable or any Sony/Nikon sensor for that matter and that could be valuable equally for both types of shooters. I guess I was just thinking that the high MPs wouldn't actually matter as much for Landscape despite it being the landscapers that usually chime in with the demand for a high MP camera??

Am I missing something here in my reasoning? Does anyone agree with this line of thought or am I just crazy loco

If you read this far...thanks for sticking around.

Geoff

Edited on Jan 08, 2014 at 10:55 AM · View previous versions



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:30 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


arbitrage wrote:
I was just reading a thread over on the Nikon board about the choice between a D3x and D800E and a very good reply by Steve Perry got me to thinking about all this high MP discussion that is everywhere these days since 2012 and the D800 introduction.

Most of the time it is the landscape shooters that seem to be really clambering for the high MPs in most of the threads about this. They always want to print big and want every available MP.

However, I started thinking about the differences between landscape shooting on a tripod and perfect latitude to
...Show more


I shoot a lot of landscapes and even though I shoot off of a tripod, many times I still have to crop the shot. Things like cliffs, rocks water etc... get in the way while framing so in the ideal world, you can frame just right in the camera...but in the real world nothing like this exists.

I also print larger than 30"...so more pixels is always better.

Wildlife shooter could use more pixels to allow more cropping, but typically wildlife shots are not printeed large so the extra pixels needed for printing are not usually required for wildlife.



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:36 AM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


Higher MP for landscapes is useful for creative aspect-ratio cropping.

Wildlife shooters usually get their cropability by using higher-density APS-C bodies, although having that same density on a FF sensor yields a more versatile camera.



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:42 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


chez wrote:
I shoot a lot of landscapes and even though I shoot off of a tripod, many times I still have to crop the shot. Things like cliffs, rocks water etc... get in the way while framing so in the ideal world, you can frame just right in the camera...but in the real world nothing like this exists.

I also print larger than 30"...so more pixels is always better.

Wildlife shooter could use more pixels to allow more cropping, but typically wildlife shots are not printeed large so the extra pixels needed for printing are not usually required for wildlife.


Good point Chez. I only do a little bit of landscape stuff but I did have these same thoughts in the back of my head as I wrote out the OP. I just didn't realize that landscapers would be cropping that often unless shooting from very inaccessible locations like near cliffs and stuff. I print wildlife at 24x36 and at 20x30 most often. When I print large landscapes they are usually stitched 20x60 panoramics from ~9 portrait frames. I don't think that even the D800 would have enough resolution to crop out a 20x60 aspect and print at that size so sticking still seems to be the way to go.



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:50 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


snapsy wrote:
Higher MP for landscapes is useful for creative aspect-ratio cropping.

Wildlife shooters usually get their cropability by using higher-density APS-C bodies, although having that same density on a FF sensor yields a more versatile camera.



The thing is if you come and look at all the best of 2013 thread in the N&W board you will see that the trend is now most of us are using the 1DX or 1D4 or 5D3. Less and less are using the 7D as it just has too many faults. (I own all 4 of those bodies so can give an honest critique). I will be first in line if Canon can push 36MP at 10-12 FPS but I need it to be at those FPS and not less if it is to be of use to me. I think that may still be 2 generations of cameras away. 1DXIII maybe??



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:52 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


arbitrage wrote:
Good point Chez. I only do a little bit of landscape stuff but I did have these same thoughts in the back of my head as I wrote out the OP. I just didn't realize that landscapers would be cropping that often unless shooting from very inaccessible locations like near cliffs and stuff. I print wildlife at 24x36 and at 20x30 most often. When I print large landscapes they are usually stitched 20x60 panoramics from ~9 portrait frames. I don't think that even the D800 would have enough resolution to crop out a 20x60 aspect and print at that size
...Show more

Unfortunately, a lot of my landscapes have a lot of motion involved and stitching images together to gain resolution is really tough. Higher mpix out of the camera is my prefered method.

Anyting larger than 24x36 I reserve for printing on canvas which does not require the pixel density as say high gloss prints.



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:55 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


chez wrote:
Unfortunately, a lot of my landscapes have a lot of motion involved and stitching images together to gain resolution is really tough. Higher mpix out of the camera is my prefered method.

Anyting larger than 24x36 I reserve for printing on canvas which does not require the pixel density as say high gloss prints.


Yes, canvas is also what I will do if I don't have the needed PPI. I know you like to do a lot of long shutter speed work (which is great) and I've dabbled in that for a bit with ND filters and everything. How many MPs would you require to be able to print a 1:3 ratio panoramic cropped out of a FF image at 20x60?



Jan 08, 2014 at 10:57 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


So I found an online calculator and to print at 300PPI (is that the norm?) you would need 6000x18000 pixels out of your FF image. But to get the 1:3 ratio you would be cropping 50% of the image in the vertical so need a 12000x18000 image. So 216 MP camera. And that would be a 12bit 324MB file size

Edited on Jan 08, 2014 at 11:09 AM · View previous versions



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:07 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


arbitrage wrote:
Yes, canvas is also what I will do if I don't have the needed PPI. I know you like to do a lot of long shutter speed work (which is great) and I've dabbled in that for a bit with ND filters and everything. How many MPs would you require to be able to print a 1:3 ratio panoramic cropped out of a FF image at 20x60?


I've printed 36x84" canvas prints from my 5D2, but the subject matter was not too detailed to start with. It was an image of the mittens in the South West and shot during sunset so there was not that much fine detail in the original. When I shoot the rainforest on Vancouver Island, the detail in those images is truly amazing and this type of print I would not be able to go that big with without making that detail mushy. Each image has it's own unique characteristics which dictates what type of medium I print it on and how large.

For me, a 40mpix camera would probably do it. I rented a D800e for a week and the extra pixels out of it truly make a difference with large prints. The extra DR is something totally different and very much appreciated with the D800 sensors. I've been eyeing the Sony A7r recentlly but am somewhat unsure with all the alignment issues I keep reading about. Might have to rent one out with an adapter and try for myself.



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:09 AM
Don Clary
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


I rebel against the common thought here that you must own 3 bodies: a 5DIII for image quality, a 1Dx or 1D4 for frame rate, and a 7D for focal length limited. I want one single body that does everything reasonably (not perfectly) well.

The only technical reason (excluding cost) for the 7D to exist, is its extreme pixel density. A full frame Canon with the same 7D pixel density would eliminate the reason for the 7D to exist.

Then out in the field, you could use this universal all around camera for landscapes, and then immediately use the same camera (with a crop mode for frame rate) for wildlife within that landscape. This continuous carrying and swapping of different bodies for different applications is ridiculous!



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:10 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


arbitrage wrote:
So I found an online calculator and to print at 300PPI (is that the norm?) you would need 6000x18000 pixels out of your FF image. But to get the 1:3 ratio you would be cropping 50% of the image in the vertical so need a 12000x18000 image. So 216 MP camera. And that would be a 12bit 324MB file size


For canvas, I can take the PPI down to 180 without really losing any resulting quality on the final canvas print.



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:10 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


chez wrote:
I've printed 36x84" canvas prints from my 5D2, but the subject matter was not too detailed to start with. It was an image of the mittens in the South West and shot during sunset so there was not that much fine detail in the original. When I shoot the rainforest on Vancouver Island, the detail in those images is truly amazing and this type of print I would not be able to go that big with without making that detail mushy. Each image has it's own unique characteristics which dictates what type of medium I print it on and how
...Show more

What PPI are you after for printing on photo papers? What PPI do you aim for on canvas?



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:12 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


Don Clary wrote:
I rebel against the common thought here that you must own 3 bodies: a 5DIII for image quality, a 1Dx or 1D4 for frame rate, and a 7D for focal length limited. I want one single body that does everything reasonably (not perfectly) well.

The only technical reason (excluding cost) for the 7D to exist, is its extreme pixel density. A full frame Canon with the same 7D pixel density would eliminate the reason for the 7D to exist.

Then out in the field, you could use this universal all around camera for landscapes, and then immediately use the same camera
...Show more


That is the ideal but I need to push 10-12 FPS so Canon would need to implement a crop mode in camera like Nikon does. However, I've read less than favourable things about Nikon's implementation of said crop mode and it isn't gaining them more than 1-2FPS so I think we are still a few years off what we really want.



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:14 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


I use a 1Ds3, 5D3, 6D and 5D2 so I'm using around 21-23 meg every day and I'm very happy with the IQ.

Just having more and more pixels isn't always the answer, there is a law of diminishing returns, 36meg in reality isn't massively bigger than 23 in actual usage, plus the more meg the more demanding it is on lenses and technique.

I was at a clients yesterday looking at wall panels about 10 feet wide made from shots I took at 400 ISO on the 1Ds3 and they were just awesomely good.

Much as I can see some landscapers wanting more pixels my standards are very high and I don't.



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:18 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


Most of my printing is done at 300ppi, because that's what my print shop uses.

I'd like to get a high MPx camera for scenic photography. The A7R looks very interesting, but I've decided to wait for a while longer, say through 2014, to see what else comes up.

I'm very happy with my 1DX and 1DIV for BIF and sports, because I like to keep the fps high. More MPx would certainly be handy for timid beasts, but the more you crop a long lens shot (with sufficient pixels), the more you see atmospheric effects. There has to be a happy balance point somewhere, and maybe I'll find it, some day.

I use different cameras for different applications, just like tools; sometimes I use a manual screw driver, and sometimes I use a driver bit on a drill. So far, there's no "one camera fits all" solution; same for screw drivers.



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:20 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


dhphoto wrote:
I use a 1Ds3, 5D3, 6D and 5D2 so I'm using around 21-23 meg every day and I'm very happy with the IQ.

Just having more and more pixels isn't always the answer, there is a law of diminishing returns, 36meg in reality isn't massively bigger than 23 in actual usage, plus the more meg the more demanding it is on lenses and technique.

I was at a clients yesterday looking at wall panels about 10 feet wide made from shots I took at 400 ISO on the 1Ds3 and they were just awesomely good.

Much as I can see some landscapers wanting
...Show more

Like I said previously, it really depends on the detail in the original image. I've made large prints from my 5D2 images which contained very little fine detail and they look great large. I cannot do the same for image that do contain fine detail as this fine detail turns to mush when printed large.

So it really depends on a few things:

1. How much detail the original scene posses. Little fine detail --> print larger.
2. The medium you use to print onto. High gloss retains fine detail, canvas not so much.
3. Your own standars as to what is great and what is not. I find everything looks great until compared to something else hanging next to it.
4. Your abilities of post processing...especially selective sharpening.


As far as more pixels requiring better technique...yes...but is that a bad thing?



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:26 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


If you could image a world in which cameras were identical as to price, size, speed of operation, ISO performance, cost of storage, and all the rest... except that you could have any number of photo sites on the sensor that you wanted, few would choose fewer photo sites.

Or, the same debate about whether it was better to stick with a lower MP sensor that was perhaps faster and had higher sensitivity, etc or to go with a higher MP sensor has been going on for well over a decade now. Back in the day the "question" might have been whether or not photographers really needed, say, 8 MP, and the idea that perhaps 6 MP "was enough."

Yet, few (but some, yes) today would settle for 6MP and the advantages of increasing MP count are fairly clear, as long as this can be accomplished at a reasonable cost and without otherwise impairing the functionality of the camera.

In the big, long-term picture there are advantages to higher MP cameras (eventually no need for AA filters, better rendering of gradients, what noise there is would have nearly invisibly small "grain size," etc.), ancillary equipment (like post-processing software, data storage, computers) also improves in ways that make the bigger files not a problem, and costs stay roughly the same or decline when corrected for inflation.

However, in the immediate present, photographers who have different needs will select different cameras from those available at the present time so that they can get the optimal performance in the areas that matter most to them and/or the compromise among performance points that they think will be ideal.

Dan

arbitrage wrote:
I was just reading a thread over on the Nikon board about the choice between a D3x and D800E and a very good reply by Steve Perry got me to thinking about all this high MP discussion that is everywhere these days since 2012 and the D800 introduction.

Most of the time it is the landscape shooters that seem to be really clambering for the high MPs in most of the threads about this. They always want to print big and want every available MP.

However, I started thinking about the differences between landscape shooting on a tripod and perfect latitude to
...Show more

Edited on Jan 08, 2014 at 11:44 AM · View previous versions



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


I would like to have a 35+ MP body for my commercial work. Bigger is better, because I like to give the customer a choice how to use the photo. Sure, you can make Billboards out of A4 sized photos (300 dpi) too… but in my commercial work the highest possible quality (in output) is what is sets me apart from other competitors. And I don't want to invest in high MP digital backs. Because of the cost, but also because such a system won't work with my way of shooting. High MP DSLR's provide a worthy alternative against a much lower cost. YMMV


Jan 08, 2014 at 11:28 AM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


We need a body with essentially double the MP to make a significant improvement in resolution. Naturally, an improvement in data handling (DIGIC) would be needed to accompany. So, that puts us in the 36-45MP range for a sensor.

I'm not even including any major improvement in DR/noise.

I have 10MP covered with my 1D3, 21MP covered with my 1Ds3 and 5D2. I'm getting great pictures from those two MP ranges. So, the next advance would be around 40MP for me to stand up and take notice.

I can't see one camera doing everything for me, except in a pinch. But, who knows? Never say never!



Jan 08, 2014 at 11:38 AM
jj_glos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · High MP Cameras...some new (old?) thoughts on the matter.....


I keep looking at the D800 for similar reasons to the OP. Although I'm just a happy snapper who rarely shoots landscape. I currently have two antique cameras in a 1Ds2 and 7D and replacing them both with a single body is very appealing (especially one with modern high ISO performance!). What holds me back from the D800 though, is that for the vast majority of what I shoot the 1Ds2 MP count is fine. For airshows and motor sports the ability to crop heavily would be great, but they're not my main bulk of work. Having to use 36MP for what are basically family and friends snapshots isn't something I relish. So I play the waiting game, I'll have to make a jump eventually though!


Jan 08, 2014 at 12:01 PM
1
       2       3       4       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.