AmbientMike Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
coralnut wrote:
Indeed, you need to look at linear resolution instead of it's square.
Looking at cameras with similar ratios: The difference between something like a D7000 at 16.2 MP and a D810 at 36.3 MP sounds like a lot, as you've got 36.3/16.2 = 2.24x more pixels, but when comparing linear resolution across the width of the frame, the difference is only 7360 / 4928 = 1.49x.
Both cameras have similarly sized pixels, 4.77 vs 4.88 um, respectively. But that 1.5x linear difference results in a HUGE difference in picture quality and resolution between the two cameras. I'm sure some of this is due to crop factor (and using more of the lens circle with the full frame camera) or a later sensor design, but the difference in linear resolution of 50% seems huge to me -- even when I compare the cameras with the sharpest of lenses. (This is a bit apples and oranges because I've never done the comparison with a 50% increase in linear resolution on identically sized sensors, but the 50% difference still seems huge to me.)...Show more →
IDK that I'd go comparing much higher mp count FF vs aps. But same sized sensor the difference between them isn't as much as I'd expected.
People used to be interested in better color off the CCD sensor, for one thing, if you are interested in something like that you might not hurt your resolution as much as you thought going back to a D70. I'm getting sharp results off a 20D, anyway.
Of course I might not be in too big of a hurry to upgrade 36mp FF to 45mp FF, not a big jump, assuming that I was happy otherwise. It's hard for the manufacturers to get ahead offering more pixels
|