p.7 #1 · Comparing 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.
p.7 #2 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
alundeb wrote:
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:
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.
p.7 #3 · Comparing 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?
p.7 #4 · Comparing 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 with not many pixels in the resulting frame?...Show more →
How do you display your images. That to me dictates the most if you will have any benefit from the increased pixels.
p.7 #5 · Comparing 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 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....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.
p.7 #6 · Comparing 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.
p.7 #7 · Comparing 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
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?
p.7 #8 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
A7R3
chez wrote:
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?
p.7 #9 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
A7R3
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.
p.7 #10 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
Fred Miranda wrote:
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....Show more →
Capture 1 has a slider to apply gradual sharpening towards the edges. Might help.
p.7 #11 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
Fred Miranda wrote:
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....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?
p.7 #12 · Comparing 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.
p.7 #13 · Comparing 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.
p.7 #16 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
vdo1 wrote:
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.
p.7 #17 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
snapsy wrote:
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.
p.7 #18 · Comparing 42MP vs 61MP: Real-World Resolution and Contrast
alundeb wrote:
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.
p.7 #19 · Comparing 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.
p.7 #20 · Comparing 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.
