par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

So if I wanted to improve how much of the frame I can fill with a subject (say birds) and I had to choose one or the other. Money be equal, would I upgrade the camera body to higher resolution and then crop or upgrade the lens to increase the lens focal length?
I am wondering which choice would yield better results, details for large prints. Also is there a mathematical formula for this? IE; 16mp to 36mp is to 300mm to 450mm.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

"Resolution" is measured in line pairs per unit of length. That is usually lp/mm. The maximum resolution you can get from any given camera can be calculated by dividing the pixels across the sensor horizontally by the width of the sensor, and then to get line pairs divide again by 2.

So lets look at two examples, a Nikon D7200 and a Nikon D810. The D7200 produces images that are 6000 pixels across from a sensor that is 23.5mm wide. 6000 / 23.5 / 2 gives a resolution of 127.67 lp/mm. A D810 produces images that are 7360 pixels across on a sensor that is 35.9mm wide. That is 102.51 lp/mm.

Hence if you can either get close enough or use a long enough focal length, the D7200 will produce an image with higher resolution (if high resolution detail exists in the scene).

If you are "focal length limited" and cannot go to a longer lens, the answer to maintaining the high resolution (with either camera) is to move closer to the subject. The same detail in a scene has twice the resolution if you are twice as close. Or if your focal length is twice as long.

If you can't get a longer focal length lens and can't get closer to the subject, the D7200 will produce a higher resolution image... as long as it is not resampled to a larger pixel size for printing. An 8x10 print straight from the camera favors the D7200 image, but a 20x30 print favors the D810.

JPL

This depends on many things. But one more thing to consider is to get a camera body with smaller sensor, f.x. Aps-C if you are currently using full frame sensor or m4/3 or 1" sensors. If you want to get close to birds on a budget a Nikon 1 camera and a Nikon 70-300 lens for that system could be your best bet. With the crop factor of ca. 2,7 you get your birds to fill your frame as if you had about 800 mm lens on full frame.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

The short answer is GET THE CAMERA!!!
For not much money, the camera will double the resolution!
The lens won't do that.
For maximum effect, get both, that's what Pros do!
SS

PS: that's assuming you're lens is NOT a $99 Spiratone!! LoL

Bill_de Loc: US

Your PS brings up a question in my mind. Is there a point, even with a quality lens, where the pixel resolution exceeds the lens resolution?

--

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Virtually all modern lenses today are as good as the best sensors... at least in the center of the image and at their best fstop. Maybe not in the corners and not wide open (expensive lenses will make the grade there too). But the higher the pixel density the greater the influence of diffraction, and we are getting closer to the day (somewhere between 150 and 250MP) where every lens will be diffraction limited at any useful aperture.

Also note that SS is wrong that only the camera can improve the resolution. What ever the focal length you have, a lens of the same quality but twice the focal length will double the resolution of your images. That is why pro wildlife photogs all have those excessively expensive heavy 600mm f/4 telephotos!

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

This is yet another of those questions which, if you were to spend a little time on research and actually came up with the answer for yourself, you would discover that you had learned a great deal more about pixel counts, camera and lens resolution, relative angles of view, etc. than you would have if you had simply been handed the answer on a velvet cushion.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

I agree.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

I agree too. (whatever he said).....

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

As one who has a 44" printer and has made many 24x36 and 30x40 pictures I would say this: you need at least six megapixels of original image size, and a program like PhotoZoom Pro. You can get away with 240 pixels per inch in the print and still be happy. Sure, the more megapixels the better, but from DSLRs, even those with 6000 pixels are going to need some up-sizing to make the big print. What counts more is the quality of the lens. "GIGO" is the acronym: Garbage In, Garbage Out. Use the best lens and be happy.

When it comes to wildlife photography, the big telephoto, and a hunter's stealth is the thing. Luckily, no one wants a fully manual lens anymore. This means you can buy extremely good huge telephotos at about $0.10 on the dollar today, of course, on Ebay. All you have to do is learn to focus and use f/stops.

The idea of buying more resolution in the camera and then cropping... it is valid, but cropping past a six megapixel chunk of a big frame amplifies the need for really great glass.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

To simplify what Apaflo was saying....if a D7200 were to be made a full frame camera, it would be a 55mp camera. So, resolution wise, if your subject is going to be in the center of the sensor, go with the D7200. However, if you can fill up the sensor with your subject, go with the full frame camera, like a D810.

As far as glass goes, better glass will always improve your images, whether on crop or full frame cameras. Also, don't be afraid to put full frame glass on crop cameras. If you want to put something like a 300mm f4 or a 28-300mm on a crop camera, both of which are full frame lenses, you will get the benefit of the center portion of the glass and avoid any aberrations on the edges. You might even try the 200-500mm zoom on a crop camera. That would be totally interesting, esp. for bif's. Check out the new D500, too.

Bill_de Loc: US

200-500 on D500


http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-402726-1.html

--

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

It depends on the specific camera-lens combination. Some lenses greatly reduce the perceived megapixels in the captured photo. Depending on the specific lens, my D810 will capture from 12 to 33 perceived megapixels, according to DxO Mark.
http://www.dxomark.com/lenses/brand-nikon-tamron-sigma/mounted_on-Nikon_D810-963/launched-between-1987-and-2016/mount_type-Nikon_F_FX/focal-from-70-to-1500/lens_use_case-lens_medium-lens_wide-lens_superwide-lens_telephoto-lens_supertelephoto/lens_zoom-prime-zoom/sensor_brand-Nikon#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo

On a D750 the result is 11 to 24 perceived megapixels.

On a D7100 the result is 6 to 17 perceived megapixels.

If you operate the D810 in crop mode, the camera uses only 15 megapixels so I would expect something less than the D7100 in terms of perceived megapixels. Something on the order of 5 to 13 perceived megapixels.

The bottom line is: If you want to fill the frame and get the highest resolution, buy the highest resolution full frame camera and super-telephoto lens. (Around $15,000 plus tripod)

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

let's not knock Fred Spira - he imported some stunning lenses.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Very good answer. An analysis I had not seen before.