The discussion is over landscape photos, which are often printed large and hung in galleries and homes etc...
I don\'t see an extreme point of view being presented here. Even in my home the largest photos hanging on my wall are landscape photos (and I am not a landscape photographer), and I sure wish they would have been taken with a sensor with more MP. The A7r represents a big advantage in this regard. Why do you think a thread about a Sony release has stayed on the front page of a Canon board for so long....because Canon has not provided what landscape shooters want, and Sony now is.
It\'s pretty simple math. Ultimately we\'d like to be able to print at 300dpi. Let\'s say you make a 30 x 20\" print, you are going to need 9000 x 6000 or 54MP. So even the A7R won\'t get us there. Hence we are looking at native 24 x 16\" @ 300dpi from 36MP, which is what my Epson 3880 A2 printer can do. Of course we can interpolate and the stretch from 24 x 16 to 30 x 20 is not that much for the A7R but would be much tougher for the 5D III.
I tried some test prints and could notice improvements moving up from 180ppi all the way to 720, although I think 540 was the reasonably practical limit to notice the difference between that and 720 I had to realllllly stare carefully from as close as I could force myself to focus so that\'s taking it too far. I\'m not sure if 540 was the magic limit, I didn\'t test too much between so maybe 450 or something would be just about as good, not sure. But 180 vs 540 was HUGE and even 300 vs 540 was quite noticeable. 360 vs 540 too.
Nov 07, 2013 at 05:13 PM
Previous versions of skibum5's message #11918434 « Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses »
so that\'s taking it too far. I\'m not sure if 540 was the magic limit, I didn\'t test too much between so maybe 450 or something would be just about as good, not sure. But 180 vs 540 was HUGE and even 300 vs 540 was quite noticeable. 360 vs 540 too.