out4life2016 Loc: Bellingham, Washington

I am sure this is a discussion that has been on here many times before and i have read everything i can find about megapixels in a camera and whether or not you really need them. The part that is confusing to me is do you need more or not for large prints say 36x48 . Also question is if you dont need them and they are not as important as you would think then why do camera manufactures keep coming up with higher and higher Pixal counts in the newer cameras. if someone could shed some light on this subject or point me to a new deriction of reading i would greatly appreciate it.
Gear I am shooting with is a Canon 6D MarkII which is 26 megapixels and a Canon T3 with only 12 Megapixels. When compared side by side i really cant see the difference in photo quality and i have blown some of the T3 photos up to 24x36.

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I'm also interested

will47 Loc: Indianapolis, IN

Me also.

NCMtnMan Loc: N. Fork New River, Ashe Co., NC

Check this out. Just Googled it.

https://www.thesprucecrafts.com/megapixe-and-how-they-affect-photos-4125227

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

I'm watching this.

Country Boy Loc: Beckley, WV

Not a big article but well worded and makes understanding MP needs easier

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

One place that I can think of where megapixel count makes a difference is in cropping. A higher megapixel sensor will allow you to crop smaller while still retaining IQ.

out4life2016 Loc: Bellingham, Washington

Thank you for the link and i have read it many times and if thats the case then it means i would need to have a 78 megapixel camera to produce the size photos i preferr. however i have been able to produce them with a 26 megapixel camera some with better results then others.

Bigmike1 Loc: I am from Gaffney, S.C. but live in Utah.

The reason camera manufacturers keep making higher and higher pixel count cameras is money pure and simple. They can charge higher and higher pirces and those, who believe that the latest and most expensive camera makes them better than everybody else will rush out and spend their money. It is the same with clothes, cars, houses, etc, etc. Personally I have two old cameras, a Canon10 D and a Nikon D100. Both have about 6 megapixels. I find the quality very good for my purposes. If i want to attach photos to an e-mail to send to a friend I can attach at least 4. With a 26 megapixel camera I doubt that I could even attach one photo to an e-mail. It is a waste of money to rush out and buy the latest and most expensive equipment. I am not impressed when I am out somewhere and someone comes along with $10,000.00 worth of equipment. They don't get any better pictures than I do. They are just showing off with their expensive equipment.

ELNikkor

I have always resized down to 100kb-300kb when sharing or sending on-line or between phones. Never a "quality" issue. Even when my first digital camera would max out at 6 mp, I always set for 2mb images, unless it was an awesome scene. Never wanted to waste space with a lot of unnecessary mb on my chips and hard drives.

genocolo Loc: Vail and Gasparilla Island

In addition to enlarging prints, Isn’t the ability to crop also affected by megapixels?

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

I'm with LFingar here. That is one of the few reasons why high pixel number is of direct use. But a high megapixel count likely means the body comes with various other high-end features that are nice to have.
Anyway I should look at the article.

651roy Loc: Black Hills, SD

In need of being educated also.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

How much sharpness/detail do you want in your images? For me, that is the question. Even if you are only looking at "small" prints of your shots, if the detail is not there, I believe that you will notice.
A few years ago I did a little test. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-501318-1.html. There is definitely a difference between cameras of differing MPs. Bottom line; all of the cameras that I tested have produced and continue to produce dynamite images. But when detail is what you are after, along with sound photo technique you will want to reach for your higher MP camera.

Bison Bud

In my opinion total mega-pixels can be a trade off for most of us. While higher pixel counts do add to the possible resolution of an image, taking full advantage of this also requires the sensor to be coupled with a lens that can resolve images to a similar level. With today's ever increasing pixel counts this becomes difficult with all but the most expensive optics and therefore is a false hope for most of us. However, I do agree with the gentleman that stated that higher mega-pixels is somewhat of an advantage when heavily cropping an image and this can be useful. However, there is also the matter of low light performance where conventional wisdom has always stated that larger pixels have the advantage in light gathering capacity. While this has somewhat changed with advances in sensors and processors, I think it is still a real factor in low light. Therefore, the number of mega-pixels (at least after a certain point) may be more a sales feature than a useful one. I guess we just have to trust the manufacturers to offer the best performance possible and we will see where it all goes. Personally, I'm pretty happy with my current 24 MP sensor and intend to spend my money on better glass as I move forward with my photography. Good luck and good shooting to all.