Shutterbug57

I have a D500 with a box full of pro glass. I find that to get a picture to pixelate (show jagged lines), I have to blow the image up to at least 400%. I also have a Fuji X-T2 with the 18-55/2.8-4 kit lens. To get it to pixelate, I only have to go to about 300%. Both cameras take very good pictures (as long as I do my part), and either will print at sizes I use - 13"x19" is as large as my printer can go. I am curious what causes pixelization p the lens or the sensor? I appreciate your input.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

The sensor.
That's where the pixels are located. Each different sensor model can only take so much enlargement due to the number of pixels in different sensor sizes.

Shutterbug57

That is what I thought. By specs, the Fuji should perform at least as well as the Nikon. Both are APS-C sensors and the Fuji has a 4MP advantage. Could be the different sensor type, but it is supposed to be better.

Oh well, it works great for a briefcase camera. It is light and it’s kit lens is sharp.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The lens does not contribute to pixelation.

Pixelation starts with the sensor, but the processing is a significant contributor. Your Fuji X-T2 actually has very slightly more pixels than the D500, and if all else were equal you should be able to enlarge an image from the Fuji very slightly more than from the Nikon.

But the processing to make a JPEG image, in particular the "quality" level at which the image is saved, will have far more effect.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Shutterbug57

I am shooting RAW in both and using Lightroom. Could be there is a better processor for Fuji?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Does Fuji supply a proprietary RAW editor like Canon does? If so, I would see how that compares.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Only one thing regardless of anything else (camera, file format, processing and the like): Magnification. Every pixel is represented as a square. The closer you look the more pixelization.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

It is a combination of sensor and software. The only thing the lense does is determine how much detail gets to the sensor. The pixelation can be controlled and modified to a degree through software. But it is ultimately limited by the resolution (pixels) of the sensor.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Pixilation is a digital phenomenon. It comes from a sensor converting light to a digital form.

The process of converting a file from RAW to JPEG requires a decision on the part of the operator. How much compression or, how big a file. JPEGs are compressed files and are not as detailed as the original. How much is lost depends on how much YOU chose to compress the image.

However, even the least compressed JPEG (biggest file) still has a series of "dots" (pixels) that make up the image. A 24 MP camera has 6,000 by 4,000 dots. This is determined by the sensor. When the image is blown up one sees these individual "dots"

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Do you folks even understand what a pixel is?

hassighedgehog Loc: Corona, CA

The size of the individual pixels also can make a difference. Using smaller pixels is how one full frame camera can have a different MP than another.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I saw no indication that anyone did not understand what a pixel is, at least until your post. It follows on your previous post (suggesting that magnification is the one and only cause of pixelatuon) which was clear evidence that you do not actually understand the causes of pixelation.

We can start with the exact same raw sensor data from the same camera to make two different images. We can magnify the two images to exactly the same display size... and easily have one that shows vastly more pixelation than the other.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

A pixel is the individual sensor on the sensor chip. The representation of the image's pixels on a monitor is a digitally prodouced square or rectangle to produce a mosaic of what the pixels at the sensor saw. Pixel size, pixel density, interpolation, algorithms, monitor resolution, Bayer pattern, etc. all affect "pixelation". One can take any 24mp image and process it to produce a 24 "pixel" image (4 X 6 image) on the monitor. Each "pixel" will be the average color and brightness of the 1mp it represents. It will not be a pretty or a recognizable image but it can be done. And one can go the other way with software. There is software that will take a "look" at the existing pixels and generate pixels that do not exist in the original image (resizzing up) through the software algorithms and interpolation. One can take a 24mp image and produce a 36mp image that way. And one can zoom in on the individual pixels of the actual image (pixel peeping).

In the OP's case, it is the difference in the software for each camera manufacturer, and how that manufacturer outputs the data, without the photograher's interference, that seems to be the difference of what the OP is seeing in pixelation.

bcrawf

Visible pixillation is a matter of the combination of sensor and magnification.