gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Without being specific to these two cameras — neither of which I own — let me address the MP question itself.
The two biggest reasons we hear for wanting the higher MP sensors are:
1. Potentially greater detail in highly magnified presentations of the photographs. (To me that means quite large prints, say 20” x 30” and larger.)
2. Potential to crop into the image more while maintaining sufficient pixel dimensions.
Regarding #1, it is useful to ask yourself how large you are typically going to make your prints or screen displays. If you are going to make very large prints (and you are shooting in a way that ensures camera stability, e.g. using a tripod), then the value of the higher MP sensors is potentially significant. On the other hand, if you are mostly going to share on social media, a web site, in emails to friends and family, or smaller prints… you aren’t likely to see any meaningful difference.
Regarding #2, there are several things to ask. First, how often will you need to crop into the images extensively enough that the difference might be significant? If it isn’t a regular thing, then the value of the added MP might not be worth it. (Consider also, that if you do this a lot you’ll need to be extra careful about camera stability, just as you would if you were making the larger prints mentioned in #1 above.) Second, while cropping is certainly a useful alternative to carrying a somewhat longer lens in some cases, it isn’t exactly “free.” While cropping makes a section of the image “larger,” it also increases the size and visibility of any image imperfections — diffraction blur, slightly inaccurate focus, camera shake, subject motion. (As above, if you are sharing photos somewhat casually, this may not be a big issue.)
33MP is actually a pretty decent pixel resolution. While I use higher MP cameras today, I have prints from 20MP (and even 12MP) full frame cameras that work well at quite large sizes. Again, unless you are making really big prints, there’s quite a bit of cropping potential even with 33MP.
Good luck with our decision.
phinix wrote:
I'm about to buy a camera for my family trips - picked a7cii being smallest best performance FF body.
I had Nikon Zf but t was to damn heavy with two zooms I was carrying last holiday and decided to sell it and get smaller body.
Now I'm wondering - should I go for R or just Cii? Purely for cropping ability of 60MP.
Stills only, I may occasionally record a video, but I only take photos.
So I was thinking - I will use it 99% of the time with that new Sigma 20-60mm lens. 60MP would be only used for potential cropping, so I dont have to swap lens and have "zoom" in a form of apsc crop.
Price wise - a7cii £1100, a7cr - £1500. £400 difference towards lens.
My thinking right now is a7cii with 33MP should be enough, if I had to crop I would do that and get what.. 15MP, which should be fine as well for family photos.
I just wanted to ask you guys as I dont want to make mistake at the point of purchase not picking a7cr. To be honest, I rarely needed longer lens during my trips, mostly I love 20mm, maybe going to 40mm, so 20-60mm lens as soon as it came up I was very happy. I'm not a pro, dont need high res for printing wallpapers. Purely for cropping purposes, is it better to take 60MP?
Saving £400 is huge as I can get lens for it. I'm trying to imagine how many times I would need 60MP. Also thinking how harder will be files handling later, if I shoot 60MP all the time, or maybe set it on some smaller file size, I dont know if a7cr let you pick like take 40MP photos, then if I need to "zoom in", I would switch to 60MP and crop then. Weird exercise, but dont really know how you guys use high res for cropping when in the field.
Please let me know your opinion....Show more →
|
