MP wise, where's sweet spot on FF sensors...
/forum/topic/1155125/0

1
       2       3       4       5       end

Michaelparris
Registered: Sep 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2149
Country: United States

In your opinion. If not your opinion is there technological proof of where the sweet spot is...



jcolwell
Registered: Feb 10, 2005
Total Posts: 19090
Country: Canada

We probably haven't yet found it. Stay tuned.



alundeb
Registered: Nov 06, 2005
Total Posts: 4194
Country: Norway

Some say big pixels are sweet, other say small pixels are cute. I am in the latter group.



mttran
Registered: Nov 03, 2005
Total Posts: 6239
Country: United States

alundeb wrote:
Some say big pixels are sweet, other say small pixels are cute. I am in the latter group.

am easy...i take either one pleasing my eyes



parquin
Registered: Oct 01, 2012
Total Posts: 19
Country: Canada

What are you trading off to find a 'sweet-spot'. I'm quite happy anywhere from about 16-20 but I'd emphasize low noise quite strongly.



EB-1
Registered: Jan 09, 2003
Total Posts: 21616
Country: United States

About 80-100MP.

EBH



Psychic1
Registered: Jul 25, 2006
Total Posts: 4199
Country: United States

The 1D (4mp) was great, the 10D (6mp) was better, the 5D (12mp) was phenominal and the 1DsIII (21mp) is outstanding.

46 will hold me for a while.



jerbear00
Registered: Jan 17, 2011
Total Posts: 665
Country: N/A

Michaelparris wrote:
In your opinion. If not your opinion is there technological proof of where the sweet spot is...


I have no idea. Maybe depends on what you shoot and at what ISO



RobDickinson
Registered: Sep 25, 2009
Total Posts: 3205
Country: New Zealand

The 'sweet spot' is always moving depending on technology.
If we ignore tech limits then we can dispatch any talk of sweet spots.

I think Sony could do a decent 60-70mp ff sensor right now.



Sneakyracer
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Total Posts: 2366
Country: United States

I think the current 20-24mp FF resolutions are a real sweet spot.

But, for Landscapers to be totally happy you are looking at 60-80MP and 4fps with 15 stop DR at around $3000.



jctriguy
Registered: Oct 04, 2004
Total Posts: 967
Country: Canada

Sneakyracer wrote:
I think the current 20-24mp FF resolutions are a real sweet spot.

But, for Landscapers to be totally happy you are looking at 60-80MP and 4fps with 15 stop DR at around $3000.


If prefer that for $1000 if we are making things up



Michaelparris
Registered: Sep 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2149
Country: United States

All things considered, IQ,DR,High ISO shooting....Just as with anything there is an apex where everything is performing at or close to its peek...Just curious as to where some may think that is. There has to be a point where there are too many mp's for that size of sensor and a point where you have not got the most out of it....



Michaelparris
Registered: Sep 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2149
Country: United States

Psychic1 wrote:
The 1D (4mp) was great, the 10D (6mp) was better, the 5D (12mp) was phenominal and the 1DsIII (21mp) is outstanding.

46 will hold me for a while.


But at 4mp they were not getting everything they could from the senor......I am thinking somewhere in the 20-30 mp range. After that you start to see better resolution but start to see more noise at higher iso's



Michaelparris
Registered: Sep 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2149
Country: United States

RobDickinson wrote:
The 'sweet spot' is always moving depending on technology.
If we ignore tech limits then we can dispatch any talk of sweet spots.

I think Sony could do a decent 60-70mp ff sensor right now.


But with more resolution you will sacrifice the ability to get clean files at higher iso's



RobDickinson
Registered: Sep 25, 2009
Total Posts: 3205
Country: New Zealand

Michaelparris wrote:
But with more resolution you will sacrifice the ability to get clean files at higher iso's


Thats a myth. D800 has cleaner high ISO than the D700. There are some slight compromises typically in balancing low ISO abilities and high ISO (1dx is tweaked more for higher ISo than the 5d3 , D4 more than the d800 etc) but we are at a point where that is a choice by the manufacturers rather than a limitation of the tech as such.



matejphoto
Registered: Aug 10, 2010
Total Posts: 230
Country: United States

I would like a 80Mp sensor for landscape and group shots. For everything else, I would bin the sensor to 20MP. I think that would be ideal.
At 80MP it could be 2-3FPS.
At 20Mp it would be 6+FPS.



Michaelparris
Registered: Sep 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2149
Country: United States

RobDickinson wrote:
Michaelparris wrote:
But with more resolution you will sacrifice the ability to get clean files at higher iso's


Thats a myth. D800 has cleaner high ISO than the D700. There are some slight compromises typically in balancing low ISO abilities and high ISO (1dx is tweaked more for higher ISo than the 5d3 , D4 more than the d800 etc) but we are at a point where that is a choice by the manufacturers rather than a limitation of the tech as such.


interesting....



Michaelparris
Registered: Sep 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2149
Country: United States

matejphoto wrote:
I would like a 80Mp sensor for landscape and group shots. For everything else, I would bin the sensor to 20MP. I think that would be ideal.
At 80MP it could be 2-3FPS.
At 20Mp it would be 6+FPS.


Do you think we will eventually see an 80 mp FF sensor?



alundeb
Registered: Nov 06, 2005
Total Posts: 4194
Country: Norway

Michaelparris wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Michaelparris wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Some say big pixels are sweet, other say small pixels are cute. I am in the latter group.


Thanks for the well educated idiotic response....


Lighten up

And thanks for your well defined question.


Others seemed to understand it just fine....I stand by my response to your post


Ok. I understand the question. And my answer is the same as everybody else:
Between 20 and 100 MP, and it depends on a lot of things you have not specified.



jctriguy
Registered: Oct 04, 2004
Total Posts: 967
Country: Canada

Michaelparris wrote:
matejphoto wrote:
I would like a 80Mp sensor for landscape and group shots. For everything else, I would bin the sensor to 20MP. I think that would be ideal.
At 80MP it could be 2-3FPS.
At 20Mp it would be 6+FPS.


Do you think we will eventually see an 80 mp FF sensor?


Why wouldn't we? My first camera was 1.6 mp.

Are you looking for the 'sweet spot' right now or at some point in the future? Technology will inevitably move forward and what is the best right now will not be the best a year or two from now.



1
       2       3       4       5       end