Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
p.7 #1Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Sep 21, 2019 at 08:16 AM
p.7 #2Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
alundeb wrote:
The CV 15/4.5 III is a great little ultra wide but it's an older design. It's very sharp at center and it certainly benefits from 60MP. However, off-axis and specially towards the corners, there is very little difference between 42MP and 60MP as you can see in the crops below:
I expect the FE 12-24/4 G and Sigma 14-24/2.8 Art @15mm to do much better towards the corners at 60MP.So the differences in this example will be noticeable only when at 2:1 magnification versus the display resolution.
In terms of prints, it will be then noticeable if you print the images at 150dpi instead of the common 300dpi standard. So quick question - how big is an R4 image printed at 150dpi? 64” on long side?Curiosity got the best of me. Biggest metal prints I ever printed were 24X36. With 42MP it makes it 220PPI and it is more than enough for that size. With 60MP and very large 60X40 metal print ($600 at Adorama) the print will be at 158 PPI. So I used Fred's test pictures and printed them on my photo printer scaled to 158 PPI. Of course from normal viewing distance about 4ft for 60x40 size of print I couldn't even see the fine details. I had to get closer than 18" to see the difference between "worse" A7RIII part and A7RIV. Your vision may vary, but I doubt that anybody would be looking at 60X40 print from less than 2 ft. That tells me unless you need billboard size prints, 60MP is overkill. Of course extreme cropping can use extra pixels, but I'm not sure that less than perfect lenses will show much benefit from extra resolution.Probably in the minority, but I am not buying the premise that people wouldn't look at large prints from 18" distance. For me that is the whole point of printing big, letting people go closer and see detail they didn't think was possible.
If you have the creative talent, technical skill, time/opportunity and a great tripod, 61MPix can be put to good use, but why not 150MPix? After years of viewing this board, it is clear that some have all these characteristics, but the majority are aspiring to join the few. So, this camera is a welcome "affordable" addition to the toolbox. For me, at my normal viewing distance, print size and subject, my A9 is perfect. For most, their cellphone is the best fit.
Prior to visiting:
https://www.natgeofineart.com/
I would have argued against high MPix, but at the National Geographic Fine Arts Gallery displays, in a small space, huge prints from decades of the magazines publication. You are forced to view from a close distance. Some of the images were from the film era. This fact has me really stumped, because every image was stunning and some of the film based images could not have been taken with view cameras.
samosh wrote
vdo1 wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Voigtlander 15/4.5 III E-mount A7R3 vs A7R4The CV 15/4.5 III is a great little ultra wide but it's an older design. It's very sharp at center and it certainly benefits from 60MP. However, off-axis and specially towards the corners, there is very little difference between 42MP and 60MP as you can see in the crops below:
I expect the FE 12-24/4 G and Sigma 14-24/2.8 Art @15mm to do much better towards the corners at 60MP.
In terms of prints, it will be then noticeable if you print the images at 150dpi instead of the common 300dpi standard. So quick question - how big is an R4 image printed at 150dpi? 64” on long side?
If you have the creative talent, technical skill, time/opportunity and a great tripod, 61MPix can be put to good use, but why not 150MPix? After years of viewing this board, it is clear that some have all these characteristics, but the majority are aspiring to join the few. So, this camera is a welcome "affordable" addition to the toolbox. For me, at my normal viewing distance, print size and subject, my A9 is perfect. For most, their cellphone is the best fit.
Prior to visiting:
https://www.natgeofineart.com/
I would have argued against high MPix, but at the National Geographic Fine Arts Gallery displays, in a small space, huge prints from decades of the magazines publication. You are forced to view from a close distance. Some of the images were from the film era. This fact has me really stumped, because every image was stunning and some of the film based images could not have been taken with view cameras.
Sep 21, 2019 at 08:57 AM
p.7 #3Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left with not many pixels in the resulting frame?
Sep 21, 2019 at 09:15 AM
p.7 #4Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left...Show more →
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left...Show more →
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.
Sep 21, 2019 at 09:50 AM
p.7 #5Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
philip_pj wrote:
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the...Show more →
Honestly, moving from 42MP to 60MP shows a clear improvement in resolution, but this boost isn't uniform across all lenses or the entire image field. I've found that my top lenses, like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM, and FE 50/1.4 ZA, see the most benefit, with around a 15-20% resolution increase in the center. However, the resolution gain drops off more noticeably towards the edges compared to using a 42MP sensor with the same lenses. This uneven resolution—more pronounced at the edges—makes me hesitant to push beyond 60MP with current sensor and lens technology. In the future, innovations like curved sensors might offer improvements. For now, combining 60MP with Topaz GP seems to be the best solution for my large print needs.
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the...Show more →
Honestly, moving from 42MP to 60MP shows a clear improvement in resolution, but this boost isn't uniform across all lenses or the entire image field. I've found that my top lenses, like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM, and FE 50/1.4 ZA, see the most benefit, with around a 15-20% resolution increase in the center. However, the resolution gain drops off more noticeably towards the edges compared to using a 42MP sensor with the same lenses. This uneven resolution—more pronounced at the edges—makes me hesitant to push beyond 60MP with current sensor and lens technology. In the future, innovations like curved sensors might offer improvements. For now, combining 60MP with Topaz GP seems to be the best solution for my large print needs.
Sep 21, 2019 at 10:22 AM
p.7 #6Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
- 11x14” framed, mostly portraits
- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
chez wrote:
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.
- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
chez wrote:
vdo1 wrote
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left with not many pixels in the resulting frame?Sep 21, 2019 at 10:23 AM
p.7 #7Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
- 11x14” framed, mostly portraits
- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.
I don't see you benefitting going with the A7R4 strictly for the 61mpix...but maybe the other improvements might be a benefit. What camera do you use today?
- 11x14” framed, mostly portraits
- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
chez wrote
vdo1 wrote
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left with not many pixels in the resulting frame?I don't see you benefitting going with the A7R4 strictly for the 61mpix...but maybe the other improvements might be a benefit. What camera do you use today?
Sep 21, 2019 at 10:37 AM
p.7 #8Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
A7R3
chez wrote:
- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.I don't see you benefitting going with the A7R4 strictly for the 61mpix...but maybe the other improvements might be a benefit. What camera do you use today?
chez wrote:
vdo1 wrote
- 11x14” framed, mostly portraits- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
chez wrote
vdo1 wrote
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left with not many pixels in the resulting frame?Sep 21, 2019 at 10:39 AM
p.7 #9Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
A7R3
- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.I don't see you benefitting going with the A7R4 strictly for the 61mpix...but maybe the other improvements might be a benefit. What camera do you use today?
I'd just keep shooting what you got. I'd debating the A7R3 and R4. Currently use a combination of R2 and R. I do shoot landscape and print them large for the upscale redecorating market.
A7R3
chez wrote
vdo1 wrote
- 11x14” framed, mostly portraits- 8x10 in albums, mix of portraits and best tourism pics
- 5x7 in albums, mostly documentary
- 4k on 75” TV screen slideshows of everything I have (Sony yay, I’m a fanboy I guess)
- smartphone 2MP size as transferred by Sony’s app
- 1200x800 pixels pics on FM forum lol
chez wrote
vdo1 wrote
So how do I go forward with this - I’m not an artist worth displaying in a gallery and I’m not even aspiring to it? I do travel photo, 99.99% handheld with little time to frame correctly, not even holding the camera horizontal as some other tourist groups are pushing me around etc? I don’t think 60MP would make my pics any sharper (my hand steadiness is the limit) but I do appreciate more editorial space since, with an UWA used in the mentioned circumstances, and after lens distortion correction, levelling and maybe some keystone correction too, sometimes I’m left with not many pixels in the resulting frame?I'd just keep shooting what you got. I'd debating the A7R3 and R4. Currently use a combination of R2 and R. I do shoot landscape and print them large for the upscale redecorating market.
Sep 21, 2019 at 10:56 AM
p.7 #10Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
Fred Miranda wrote:
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.Honestly, moving from 42MP to 60MP shows a clear improvement in resolution, but this boost isn't uniform across all lenses or the entire image field. I've found that my top lenses, like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM, and FE 50/1.4 ZA, see the most benefit, with around a 15-20% resolution increase in the center. However, the resolution gain drops off more noticeably towards the edges compared to using a 42MP sensor with the same lenses. This uneven resolution—more pronounced at the edges—makes me hesitant to push beyond 60MP with current sensor and lens technology. In the future,...Show more →
Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.
philip_pj wrote
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.
Sep 21, 2019 at 11:32 AM
|
p.7 #11Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
Fred Miranda wrote:
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.Honestly, moving from 42MP to 60MP shows a clear improvement in resolution, but this boost isn't uniform across all lenses or the entire image field. I've found that my top lenses, like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM, and FE 50/1.4 ZA, see the most benefit, with around a 15-20% resolution increase in the center. However, the resolution gain drops off more noticeably towards the edges compared to using a 42MP sensor with the same lenses. This uneven resolution—more pronounced at the edges—makes me hesitant to push beyond 60MP with current sensor and lens technology. In the future,...Show more →
This is such an interesting and sophisticated take on how the new camera is rendering, and it is very useful for thinking about how to use the a7r4. Very much appreciated.
Is there an implication here that very high resolution will increase the effects of field curvature in a lens?
philip_pj wrote
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
This is such an interesting and sophisticated take on how the new camera is rendering, and it is very useful for thinking about how to use the a7r4. Very much appreciated.
Is there an implication here that very high resolution will increase the effects of field curvature in a lens?
Sep 21, 2019 at 11:59 AM
p.7 #12Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
This is the first time Sony increased resolution in a substantial way. I think it's incredible that the A7R IV actually keeps up with the lower MP bodies in respect to DR, speed and FPS.
The Nikon D800 was released almost 8 years ago with Sony's 36MP sensor (similar to the one on the original A7R). This was the higher MP sensor for a long time, only outshined by the Sony A7RII with 42MP but that was only a 8% increase in linear resolution.
Now we have 60.2MP (effective) which is 20% more than 42MP and about 30% more than 36MP.
The Nikon D800 was released almost 8 years ago with Sony's 36MP sensor (similar to the one on the original A7R). This was the higher MP sensor for a long time, only outshined by the Sony A7RII with 42MP but that was only a 8% increase in linear resolution.
Now we have 60.2MP (effective) which is 20% more than 42MP and about 30% more than 36MP.
Sep 21, 2019 at 12:01 PM
p.7 #13Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
Thanks @chiron!
The effects of field curvature will not change since it is lens related but field curvature and lens asymmetry (decentering, tilt) will be more noticeable on 60MP than they were on a lower MP sensor.
The effects of field curvature will not change since it is lens related but field curvature and lens asymmetry (decentering, tilt) will be more noticeable on 60MP than they were on a lower MP sensor.
Sep 21, 2019 at 12:18 PM
p.7 #14Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
42 is magic, just look at this, I never thought a number could have so many features:
42
lol
Edited on Sep 21, 2019 at 12:22 PM · View previous versions
42
lol
Edited on Sep 21, 2019 at 12:22 PM · View previous versions
Sep 21, 2019 at 12:19 PM
p.7 #15Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.Honestly, I see a noticeable improvement in resolution going from 42MP to 60MP but the linear resolution boost does not happen equally for all lenses across the entire image field. I've noticed that my best lenses like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM and FE 50/1.4 ZA benefited the most and perhaps there is a 20% resolution increase around the center area. However, away from center, resolution seems to decreases more abruptly compared to using a 42MP sensor and the same lens. The higher discrepancy between center and edges makes resolution even more uneven so with the current sensor/lens tech, I would not want to go any higher in MP. Perhaps something like a curved sensor or similar could make things improve in the future.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.
This could definitely even out things in terms of rendering. I started doing something similar in LR (with a simple preset)
Fred Miranda wrote
philip_pj wrote
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.
This could definitely even out things in terms of rendering. I started doing something similar in LR (with a simple preset)
Sep 21, 2019 at 12:20 PM
p.7 #16Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.Honestly, I see a noticeable improvement in resolution going from 42MP to 60MP but the linear resolution boost does not happen equally for all lenses across the entire image field. I've noticed that my best lenses like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM and FE 50/1.4 ZA benefited the most and perhaps there is a 20% resolution increase around the center area. However, away from center, resolution seems to decreases more abruptly compared to using a 42MP sensor and the same lens. The higher discrepancy between center and edges makes resolution even more uneven so with the current sensor/lens tech, I would not want to go any higher in MP. Perhaps something like a curved sensor or similar could make things improve in the future.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.
Do you mean toward the edges of the frame or the contrast edges detected by its sharpening logic? A quick look at C1's documentation implies the latter, which doesn't really address the center/edge lens sharpness discrepancy Fred was speaking to.
Fred Miranda wrote
philip_pj wrote
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.
Do you mean toward the edges of the frame or the contrast edges detected by its sharpening logic? A quick look at C1's documentation implies the latter, which doesn't really address the center/edge lens sharpness discrepancy Fred was speaking to.
Sep 21, 2019 at 12:46 PM
p.7 #17Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
snapsy wrote:
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.Honestly, I see a noticeable improvement in resolution going from 42MP to 60MP but the linear resolution boost does not happen equally for all lenses across the entire image field. I've noticed that my best lenses like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM and FE 50/1.4 ZA benefited the most and perhaps there is a 20% resolution increase around the center area. However, away from center, resolution seems to decreases more abruptly compared to using a 42MP sensor and the same lens. The higher discrepancy between center and edges makes resolution even more uneven so with the current sensor/lens tech, I would not want to go any higher in MP. Perhaps something like a curved sensor or similar could make things improve in the future.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.Do you mean toward the edges of the frame or the contrast edges detected by its sharpening logic? A quick look at C1's documentation implies the latter, which doesn't really address the center/edge lens sharpness discrepancy Fred was speaking to.
C1 has a "sharpness falloff" correction slider under lens corrections.
vdo1 wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
philip_pj wrote
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.
C1 has a "sharpness falloff" correction slider under lens corrections.
Sep 21, 2019 at 01:16 PM
p.7 #18Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
alundeb wrote:
Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.Honestly, I see a noticeable improvement in resolution going from 42MP to 60MP but the linear resolution boost does not happen equally for all lenses across the entire image field. I've noticed that my best lenses like the Voigtlander 65/2 APO, FE 135/1.8 GM and FE 50/1.4 ZA benefited the most and perhaps there is a 20% resolution increase around the center area. However, away from center, resolution seems to decreases more abruptly compared to using a 42MP sensor and the same lens. The higher discrepancy between center and edges makes resolution even more uneven so with the current sensor/lens tech, I would not want to go any higher in MP. Perhaps something like a curved sensor or similar could make things improve in the future.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.Do you mean toward the edges of the frame or the contrast edges detected by its sharpening logic? A quick look at C1's documentation implies the latter, which doesn't really address the center/edge lens sharpness discrepancy Fred was speaking to.C1 has a "sharpness falloff" correction slider under lens corrections.
Thanks. So does it decrease sharpening toward the edges of the frame or increase it? If the latter, how intelligent is it with the management of radius, because applying sharpening to a progressively softer region would usually just create sharpening artifacts when using a constant radius. In fact even with a variable radius it would be hard to visualize how sharpening would improve matters.
snapsy wrote
vdo1 wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
philip_pj wrote
What differentiates base resolution in comparisons is the 'law of diminishing returns'. You can't reasonably use a 2005 12mp sensor as a base and expect an increase from a 2019 42mp sensor as base to behave or be perceived in similar fashion. One left most users thirsty for (much) more, the other sates most appetites, even for high demand uses. What level of demand exists for 80mp? How large a print is required to impress over 61mp?Moreover, 42mp was chosen for its fine balance of characteristics and breakthrough sensor architecture - Sony was aware few needed them to match the low DR (two stops down) 50mp Canon unit.
It would not surprise if this a7rIV is close to the last roll of the resolution dice in the 135 format. Each throw builds the satiation percentage of the user base closer to 100%, apart from specialised use cases that will always get well (and disproportionately) aired on gear forums. But it's tremendous news for buyers of older Sony cameras.
Until then, 60MP + Topaz GP seems to be the best compromise for my big print needs.
Thanks. So does it decrease sharpening toward the edges of the frame or increase it? If the latter, how intelligent is it with the management of radius, because applying sharpening to a progressively softer region would usually just create sharpening artifacts when using a constant radius. In fact even with a variable radius it would be hard to visualize how sharpening would improve matters.
Sep 21, 2019 at 02:32 PM
p.7 #19Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
Increase it . I would say about 20 percent . I used it a lot when shooting Medium Format with the Mamiya 28. I have some killer interiors using that lens and sharpening . Like anything you have to be careful not to overdo it.
Sep 21, 2019 at 02:42 PM
p.7 #20Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
GMPhotography wrote:
Increase it . I would say about 20 percent . I used it a lot when shooting Medium Format with the Mamiya 28. I have some killer interiors using that lens and sharpening . Like anything you have to be careful not to overdo it.
Thanks. If you or anyone else has the time I'd love to see before/after crops of the center vs extreme edge of this C1 area-dependent lens correction sharpening in action.
Increase it . I would say about 20 percent . I used it a lot when shooting Medium Format with the Mamiya 28. I have some killer interiors using that lens and sharpening . Like anything you have to be careful not to overdo it.
Thanks. If you or anyone else has the time I'd love to see before/after crops of the center vs extreme edge of this C1 area-dependent lens correction sharpening in action.
Sep 21, 2019 at 02:49 PM