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

My posts · My subscriptions
  

  Previous versions of Suresh T's message #11003088 « Your choice of body for wildlife? »

  

Suresh T
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Your choice of body for wildlife?


RE pixels per duck, for the physics inclined, here is a detailed explanation:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/cropfactor/index.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/telephoto_reach/index.html

To summarize the above analysis for the purposes of this discussion, for a given body/focal length combination, "pixel pitch" determines resolution. Below is the pixel pitch in microns for a few Canons DSLRs (lower is better):

1D3: 7.2
5D2: 6.4
1D4: 5.7
7D: 4.3

To get a better idea of what the above numbers mean, below is a comparison of the "relative" pixels the following body/lens combination puts on a subject at the same distance from the camera (higher is better):

300mm+5D2: 1.0
300mm+1D4: 1.1
300mm+7D: 1.5

400mm+1D4: 1.5
400mm+7D: 2.0

500mm+1D4: 1.9
500mm+7D: 2.5

For example, from the above numbers, 7D+300mm (1.5) resolves for the same camera-to-subject distance:

- as much detail as 1D4+400mm (1.5)
- "50% more" detail as 5D2+300mm (1.0)

Of course, these numbers don't factor in sensor noise/quality, but in good light, a 7D sensor theoretically resolves more detail than the other sensors.

There are also diffraction limits to resolution at very long focal lengths, but I doubt most of us need to worry about that. :-)



Sep 29, 2012 at 08:39 PM
Suresh T
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Your choice of body for wildlife?


RE pixels per duck, for the physics inclined, here is a detailed explanation:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/cropfactor/index.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/telephoto_reach/index.html

To summarize the above analysis for the purposes of this discussion, for a given focal length, "pixel pitch" determines resolution. Below is the pixel pitch in microns for a few Canons DSLRs (lower is better):

1D3: 7.2
5D2: 6.4
1D4: 5.7
7D: 4.3

To get a better idea of what the above numbers mean, below is a comparison of the "relative" pixels the following body/lens combination puts on a subject at the same distance from the camera (higher is better):

300mm+5D2: 1.0
300mm+1D4: 1.1
300mm+7D: 1.5

400mm+1D4: 1.5
400mm+7D: 2.0

500mm+1D4: 1.9
500mm+7D: 2.5

For example, from the above numbers, 7D+300mm (1.5) resolves for the same camera-to-subject distance:

- as much detail as 1D4+400mm (1.5)
- "50% more" detail as 5D2+300mm (1.0)

Of course, these numbers don't factor in sensor noise/quality, but in good light, a 7D sensor theoretically resolves more detail than the other sensors.

There are also diffraction limits to resolution at very long focal lengths, but I doubt most of us need to worry about that. :-)



Sep 29, 2012 at 06:47 PM
Suresh T
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Your choice of body for wildlife?


RE pixels per duck, for the physics inclined, here is a detailed explanation:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/cropfactor/index.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/telephoto_reach/index.html

To summarize the above analysis for the purposes of this discussion, for a given focal length, "pixel pitch" determines resolution. Below is the pixel pitch for a few Canons DSLRs (lower is better):

1D3: 7.2
5D2: 6.4
1D4: 5.7
7D: 4.3

To get a better idea of what the above numbers mean, below is a comparison of the "relative" pixels the following body/lens combination puts on a subject at the same distance from the camera (higher is better):

300mm+5D2: 1.0
300mm+1D4: 1.1
300mm+7D: 1.5

400mm+1D4: 1.5
400mm+7D: 2.0

500mm+1D4: 1.9
500mm+7D: 2.5

For example, from the above numbers, 7D+300mm (1.5) resolves for the same camera-to-subject distance:

- as much detail as 1D4+400mm (1.5)
- "50% more" detail as 5D2+300mm (1.0)

Of course, these numbers don't factor in sensor noise/quality, but in good light, a 7D sensor theoretically resolves more detail than the other sensors.

There are also diffraction limits to resolution at very long focal lengths, but I doubt most of us need to worry about that. :-)



Sep 29, 2012 at 06:47 PM
Suresh T
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Your choice of body for wildlife?


RE pixels per duck, for the physics inclined, here is a detailed explanation:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/cropfactor/index.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/telephoto_reach/index.html

To summarize the above analysis for the purposes of this discussion, for a given focal length, "pixel pitch" determines resolution. Below is the pixel pitch for a few Canons DSLRs (lower is better):

1D3: 5.0
5D2: 4.4
1D4: 3.9
7D: 3.0

To get a better idea of what the above numbers mean, below is a comparison of the "relative" pixels the following body/lens combination puts on a subject at the same distance from the camera (higher is better):

300mm+5D2: 1.0
300mm+1D4: 1.1
300mm+7D: 1.5

400mm+1D4: 1.5
400mm+7D: 2.0

500mm+1D4: 1.9
500mm+7D: 2.5

For example, from the above numbers, 7D+300mm (1.5) resolves for the same camera-to-subject distance:

- as much detail as 1D4+400mm (1.5)
- "50% more" detail as 5D2+300mm (1.0)

Of course, these numbers don't factor in sensor noise/quality, but in good light, a 7D sensor theoretically resolves more detail than the other sensors.

There are also diffraction limits to resolution at very long focal lengths, but I doubt most of us need to worry about that. :-)



Sep 29, 2012 at 06:37 PM
Suresh T
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Your choice of body for wildlife?


RE pixels per duck, for the physics inclined, here is a detailed explanation:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/cropfactor/index.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/telephoto_reach/index.html

To summarize the above analysis for the purposes of this discussion, for a given focal length, "pixel pitch" determines resolution. Below is the pixel pitch for a few Canons DSLRs (lower is better):

1D3: 5.0
5D2: 4.4
1D4: 3.9
7D: 3.0

Of course, these numbers don't factor in sensor noise/quality, but in good light, a 7D sensor theoretically resolves more detail than the others.

There are also diffraction limits to resolution at very long focal lengths, but I doubt most of us need to worry about that. :-)



Sep 29, 2012 at 06:09 PM



  Previous versions of Suresh T's message #11003088 « Your choice of body for wildlife? »