I believe a lot of misunderstanding between the pro and con positions on \"more megapixels\" on one side or \"enough is enough just give better megapixels\"has to do with how people look at their pictures. I have learned that since we went more and more digital there is an audience that looks and sees photos in a \"classic\" way. They want a good print, a good processed end product on a screen that they watch from a certain distance and let it work on their eyes and brain while trying to get what the photographer wanted us to show. This is of course also the photographer himself/herself looking at own work. This is the type of static viewer\". Second we have the \"active kind\" of viewer who is looking at an image constantly scanning and looking for details. This is the viewer who zooms and pans over a large file photo mostly nowadays mostly on a screen. Digital display wachting has made this a new habit to many viewers, not just the critical photographer pixelpeeping his/her own work. Typically a landscape photographer, cityskape photographer wedding and event photographer represent more of the latter type of viewing photos. It\'s obvious that these different types of watching, not per se related to the subjects I mentioned, but more related to the kind of person you are, makes a high megapixel camera more attractive to the latter type of viewer/photographers. This has always been the case and was in the era of film often the discriminating factor between medium format or view camera photographers and the ones shooting 135 or lower formats. It\'s my conviction that digital has changed the way we look to pictures and that even though there is still a great amount of \"static viewers\" the amount of \"active viewers\" has grown, just because the tools made it possible/easy. This is also one of the reasons why, even casual non-critical photographers with their compacts love high megapixel models so much. They just love to scroll over their screens and watch details they would not be able to see when the shot was done in lower resolutions. Pixelpeepers with photographic reading skills love the quality of details and lack of abberations in those kind of files. I believe this is what Canon misunderstood when they heard the \"passive viewers\" crying to stop the megapixel war and give us better pixels. The truth is we want both. More and better megapixels. The direction the G1X and 1DX go is the wrong direction. Canon made it themselves easy. As good as the pixel quality of those cameras may be, the competition shows that they can deliver the same quality in a higher resolution package. That hurts EOSfun to many, especially many of the active viewers (and croppers)...
Feb 16, 2012 at 09:33 AM
Previous versions of eosfun's message #10350671 « 800D crops better than Canon with supetele? »
(and croppers)...