Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
APS-C, Pixels, etc.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 next>>
Oct 9, 2019 11:54:08   #
Ed Chu Loc: Rockville MD
 
seems to me, there is no bad camera, these days; I used to own a camera store, in the 80s; now, as back then, so much emphasis from the buyer was on what camera was used to take a photo, rather than the skills needed to use whatever you had

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 11:54:56   #
Bill P
 
Ed Chu wrote:
so, at the risk of being repetitive, all sensors being equal, a 20mp MFT camera would actually be better than a 24mp MFT camera ?


Like many of the questions here asking for an absolute answer, the real answer is it depends. I'm not experienced with these amounts, as the 20 MP sensors for 4/3 are more recent than any of my cameras, and I'm unaware of any 24MP 4/3 cameras, but...
It depends. What do you want? Will the difference between these two numbers enough to make a visible difference? I would think that based on other formats, the bigger sensor should be at least 30MP to give a visible difference. But the higher one isn't necessarily better unless you are shooting in full daylight, whereas the smaller one would be better in low light.

So what do you want?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 11:57:51   #
Ed Chu Loc: Rockville MD
 
an iPhone 11

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 11:59:22   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
Bill P wrote:
Like many of the questions here asking for an absolute answer, the real answer is it depends. I'm not experienced with these amounts, as the 20 MP sensors for 4/3 are more recent than any of my cameras, and I'm unaware of any 24MP 4/3 cameras, but...
It depends. What do you want? Will the difference between these two numbers enough to make a visible difference? I would think that based on other formats, the bigger sensor should be at least 30MP to give a visible difference. But the higher one isn't necessarily better unless you are shooting in full daylight, whereas the smaller one would be better in low light.

So what do you want?
Like many of the questions here asking for an abs... (show quote)


Think back to when you knew nothing about 30 megapixel sensors. Would you still want to be that person?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 12:31:46   #
Bill P
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Think back to when you knew nothing about 30 megapixel sensors. Would you still want to be that person?


Like I have said many times here, there is no black and white. I know that's what you want, but you can't always have what you want. I might want to be in a relationship with either Angelina Jolie or Jennifer Anniston, but first of all, I can't, and second if I were it might turn out to not be entirely a bed of roses.
So I can't answer your question, but if forced to answer, my initial thought would be, I dont give a s**t. I'm shooting with 12 and 16MP sensors, and am perfectly happy. The best camera ever wouldn't improve my work, but working on technique would. But that's nothing that can be purchased or quantified. Therefore, you loose.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 12:33:02   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
How do you know you're not a successful photographer until you've used the best cameras?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 12:36:44   #
Bill P
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
How do you know you're not a successful photographer until you've used the best cameras?


Just like I don't know if you're a successful comedian by reading your posts.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 12:37:29   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
Who can have a positive attitude with inferior equipment?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 12:40:03   #
Bill P
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Who can have a positive attitude with inferior equipment?


A skilled experienced photographer, of which there are few here.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 12:41:59   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
The road to success and the road to failure are both littered with discarded cameras.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 16:51:10   #
PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA
 
Ed Chu wrote:
so, at the risk of being repetitive, all sensors being equal, a 20mp MFT camera would actually be better than a 24mp MFT camera ?


... in low light, but the 24mp would have more detail in better light.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 19:59:33   #
User ID
 
Ed Chu wrote:

as I understand it, lesser pixels allow for
larger pixels, which should result in better
quality; however, more pixels also adds to
better quality; so, there is a trade-off
somewhere, or, am I oversimplifying things ?


Exactly. Everything is always a trade-off.
At current tech, including printer tech, it
happens that 24MP is usually the "sweet
spot". Obviously .... there was a different
sweet spot before the "8MP barrier" fell ...
etc etc etc

| Reply
Oct 10, 2019 03:58:53   #
lamiaceae Loc: Los Angeles Area, CA
 
PHRubin wrote:
Larger pixels are better for light collection, so are better in low light.
Larger pixel count is better for more detail.



| Reply
Oct 10, 2019 13:12:14   #
Bill P
 
User ID wrote:
Exactly. Everything is always a trade-off.
At current tech, including printer tech, it
happens that 24MP is usually the "sweet
spot". Obviously .... there was a different
sweet spot before the "8MP barrier" fell ...
etc etc etc


Not to sound like an old guy, but "There's no such thing as a free lunch."

| Reply
Oct 10, 2019 14:18:59   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
It's amazing what 30 megapixels cannot do for your photography.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.