Unusual Question: I am really having a hard time digesting this point of view that was passed to me from a customer who was carrying a D3 around his neck. We were talking about the new...

butsudo

I am really having a hard time digesting this point of view that was passed to me from a customer who was carrying a D3 around his neck. We were talking about the new d800 with the high megapixel rating and he came up with the statement that the cameras can keep going up in megapixel size but the lens don't keep up with the progression. Now, my question is what does the lens have to do with the size of the image (megapixel) progression?

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Not much. I am using 40-yo manual Nikkor lenses on my D90, as well as recent Nikkor VR2 lenses.

olcoach Loc: Oregon

Hi, We need a lens to get a picture but it certainly doesn't relate to megapixels. Have fun and keep shootin'. Mike

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The higher the MP count of the sensor, the more it will show you just how good (or bad) your lens really is.

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

Lenses don't really need to "keep up" with the progression in pixel count on camera sensors, they already have a comfortable lead in performance. Most of today's upper level lenses are capable of more sharpness, higher resolution, better definition, and most certainly contrast than even the finest CCD or CMOS sensors available today.
This is one more reason lenses are a far better investment than camera bodies are.
As Nikonian noted, he us using some 40yr. old Nikkor lenses, and today's sensors have not made these lenses obsolete by any means.
Rest easy, Grasshopper, lens performance is Just Fine!

Oh...I have more 40yr. old Nikkor lenses than Nikonian, and I would not trade them for the newest version of the same lens...ever!

Bigdaver

I think you're wrong. The tests show the D800 (or D7000) are riding right up to the limit on the best Nikon lenses, and less than the best don't get the most out of those sensors. You can only get so much resolution from a lens before the wavelength of light limits you. In the real world, vibration and motion still keep most situations from showing those limitations clearly.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

Bigdaver wrote:

I think you're wrong. The tests show the D800 (or D7000) are riding right up to the limit on the best Nikon lenses, and less than the best don't get the most out of those sensors. You can only get so much resolution from a lens before the wavelength of light limits you. In the real world, vibration and motion still keep most situations from showing those limitations clearly.

I hate to say it, but I think you are wrong. Really good glass, and lack of movement (ie. tripod, monopod, fast speeds) are going to make the difference. Light is light, and the wavelengths are staying constant with the same lens.

Not trying to pick a fight, but your "wavelength of light" completely confuses me.

Bigdaver

Once you resolve so far, you are limited (diffraction limit) by the wavelength of light. That is why you can only go so far with a microscope, or camera. The D800/D7000 is working right at the practical side of that limit. Very few lenses are that good.
In real world use, your handshake, refraction in the air, subject movement, are all enough to mask that. But if we go beyond the level of pixel density in these cameras you will begin binning pixels to make straight lines. Might be good for noise suppression, but true pixel level acuity will suffer. Since you rarely need more than 6MP anyway, real world use will be fine.

Roy Hakala Loc: Red Wing, MN

I have been thinking of getting a 24MP NEX-7 specifically because I could take telephoto bird photos, crop them to crate a 2x image, and still have a 6 MP image. Good idea or not? Maybe I need a pro-level lens to make this idea work?

MtnMan Loc: ID

Roy Hakala wrote:

I have been thinking of getting a 24MP NEX-7 specifically because I could take telephoto bird photos, crop them to crate a 2x image, and still have a 6 MP image. Good idea or not? Maybe I need a pro-level lens to make this idea work?

Check the noise characteristics. In general more megapixels on the same size sensor means more noise. The NEX-7 sensor is smaller than a DSLR so at a disadvantage from that perspective.

Each generation of sensor has better noise characteristics so being relatively recent the NEX-7 won't be too bad compared to DSLRs of even a few years ago.

docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

butsudo wrote:

I am really having a hard time digesting this point of view that was passed to me from a customer who was carrying a D3 around his neck. We were talking about the new d800 with the high megapixel rating and he came up with the statement that the cameras can keep going up in megapixel size but the lens don't keep up with the progression. Now, my question is what does the lens have to do with the size of the image (megapixel) progression?

pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

My understanding is that the printing process, no matter what device you use, cannot keep up with the megapixel race. A 12MP output is just as good as a 24MP, etc. Any input?

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

pounder35 wrote:

My understanding is that the printing process, no matter what device you use, cannot keep up with the megapixel race. A 12MP output is just as good as a 24MP, etc. Any input?

At a standard 8x10 print you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. But get up to 16x20 and it starts to become apparent. At 20x30 its pretty easy to tell which camera took the image.

pounder35 Loc: "Southeast of Disorder"

MT Shooter wrote:

pounder35 wrote:

My understanding is that the printing process, no matter what device you use, cannot keep up with the megapixel race. A 12MP output is just as good as a 24MP, etc. Any input?

At a standard 8x10 print you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. But get up to 16x20 and it starts to become apparent. At 20x30 its pretty easy to tell which camera took the image.

Maybe what I said was based on older printing technology. But there still has to be a limit on how much detail you can get out of any type printer when you think about it. At sizes such as 20x30 what is the best device? Nothing I can afford I'm sure. :lol:

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

pounder35 wrote:

But there still has to be a limit on how much detail you can get out of any type printer when you think about it. At sizes such as 20x30 what is the best device? Nothing I can afford I'm sure. :lol:

Not really. The more information you put in, the more you can get out. In fine detail -- textures, hair, etc. -- you'll see more from (say) my 18 megapixel M9 than from my 10 megapixel M8, even at 12x18 inches.

But lenses do matter a great deal. My D70 with good Zeiss primes on it looks like twice the camera it is with the kit zoom on it.

Can sensors exceed lens quality? Quite easily. Can they exceed the quality of the best lenses available? Probably not yet.

Cheers,

R.