A stitched image compared to a straight image? Would a stitched landscape from a 20 or 30 full frame megapixel camera match or exceed the quality of a photo from an upgraded 50 or 60...

Whitewater11 Loc: Ellensburg, Washington

Would a stitched landscape from a 20 or 30 full frame megapixel camera match or exceed the quality of a photo from an upgraded 50 or 60 megapixel camera model?

Maybe I missed a previous post on this in my search, but it seems someone must have tested this consideration. I have been under the impression that adding more megapixel to the same sized sensor has some trade off.

Maybe a quality filter or stand alone software is a better bet than the latest best camera?

User ID

Hi rezo sensors allow hi rez recording in all circumstances, while stitching is only for static situations.

If you are concerned with ONLY static situations then stitching multiple 24mp images can easily surpass a single 60mp frame. OTOH nothing except your feeble ancient PC prevents you from stitching multiple frames from a 60mp camera instead of from a 24.

======================

I realize that the above strongly hints at an endlessly escalating spiral, which is partially true. But don’t ignore that when stitching you don’t stitch whole frames. IOW if you stitch four 60mp frames you don’t get a full 240mp result. You’ll get approximately half that ... maybe less. The actual mp count will vary with the degree of overlap. The degree of overlap depends on scene content (and often on peripheral distortion).

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Whitewater11 wrote:

Would a stitched landscape from a 20 or 30 full frame megapixel camera match or exceed the quality of a photo from an upgraded 50 or 60 megapixel camera model?.../...

Yes, if done correctly.

Some great samples here.... https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-128-1.html
Incomplete list... https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-501006-1.html

Whitewater11 Loc: Ellensburg, Washington

Thank you for the quick reply. You have answered my basic question. I had overlooked the overlap as an issue. So it might take half a dozen images at 50 % to match a sixty megabyte camera image. The upgrades that are in new equipment such as image stabilization make it a constant carrot on a stick. For most pictures my cell phone is enough and then there is Topaz and their software programs that really upgrade detail in some images. Like many, I remember the power of understanding T,A, ISO and the mystery of light and I also clearly remember the day at a wedding when someone from New York looked at my RB 67 and up at me and said, "Your film camera will soon be obsolete". I miss the simplicity and finality of milm but love the endless creative opportunity in digital.

Have a great day.

Whitewater11 Loc: Ellensburg, Washington

User ID wrote:

Hi rezo sensors allow hi rez recording in all circ... (show quote)

Thanks for the examples and advice.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Whitewater11 wrote:

Would a stitched landscape from a 20 or 30 full frame megapixel camera match or exceed the quality of a photo from an upgraded 50 or 60 megapixel camera model?

Maybe I missed a previous post on this in my search, but it seems someone must have tested this consideration. I have been under the impression that adding more megapixel to the same sized sensor has some trade off.

Maybe a quality filter or stand alone software is a better bet than the latest best camera?

If the subject is appropriate - an inanimate subject or landscape - stitching is the way to go. For one, you end up with more pixels on the scene, but the other is the relative freedom from the distortions and keystoning that are common with using ultrawide lenses, and the more natural perspective that comes from using a longer lens to create a stitched panorama. Also, one never has to worry about not having a wide enough lens.

There is another advantage - shallower depth of field is impossible to attain with wide angle lenses, and sometimes it can be useful. I shot the following image as a double row of 6 images with an 85mm lens on a full frame camera, at F2.8. It's subtle, but there is a bit of focus separation made possible compared to using a wider lens.

_DSC1933-NIKON D800-3064517-(25-10-17)-Pano by Gene Lugo, on Flickr

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

Gene51 wrote:

If the subject is appropriate - an inanimate subje... (show quote)

Gene,
May I ask? I would approach shots like this with a 50mm lens on a DX camera (My only camera.) Do you bother with precisely rotating the camera around the zero parallax axis? I don’t since I have transferred enough of my wealth to RRS.

User ID

Jack 13088 wrote:

Gene,
May I ask? I would approach shots like this with a 50mm lens on a DX camera (My only camera.) Do you bother with precisely rotating the camera around the zero parallax axis? I don’t since I have transferred enough of my wealth to RRS.

At distance the exact axis isn’t so critical. Also when using a 50 the tripod socket is usually quite close to proper location of the axis so you usually win by dumb luck.

If you choose to get picky and if your tripod’s head allows a bit of rearward displacement just eyeball it and place the film plane 50mm behind the axis. “Close enough” is, by definition, close enough !

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

User ID wrote:

At distance the exact axis isn’t so critical. Also when using a 50 the tripod socket is usually quite close to proper location of the axis so you usually win by dumb luck.

Thanks! As an engineer I rush to overthink everything geometrical. However, in the rest of life I rely on dumb luck. I had reasoned that if the immediate foreground is not in the frame it was good to go.

User ID

Jack 13088 wrote:

Thanks! As an engineer I rush to overthink everything geometrical. However, in the rest of life I rely on dumb luck. I had reasoned that if the immediate foreground is not in the frame it was good to go.

Foreground you can adjust with a weed wacker or a chain saw. That should elate your inner engineer !

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I'm doing that very thing. For me, it's been a year long project of on and off work. I finally worked out the number of small issues and was able to produce an 82MP image from a 36MP camera. There are limitations as to what one can photograph with a setup as you describe, and I'm using. Static subjects are the only thing one can photograph successfully with this approach.
--Bob

Whitewater11 wrote:

Would a stitched landscape from a 20 or 30 full frame megapixel camera match or exceed the quality of a photo from an upgraded 50 or 60 megapixel camera model?

Maybe I missed a previous post on this in my search, but it seems someone must have tested this consideration. I have been under the impression that adding more megapixel to the same sized sensor has some trade off.

Maybe a quality filter or stand alone software is a better bet than the latest best camera?

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Jack 13088 wrote:

Gene,
May I ask? I would approach shots like this with a 50mm lens on a DX camera (My only camera.) Do you bother with precisely rotating the camera around the zero parallax axis? I don’t since I have transferred enough of my wealth to RRS.

Gene is correct, but if you want a nodal slide, neewer has one, a 200mm on Amazon for 17.99. it is all metal and pretty good. I own one. I haven't seen others, but this is good quality.

Whitewater11 Loc: Ellensburg, Washington

Gene51 wrote:

If the subject is appropriate - an inanimate subje... (show quote)

Beautiful image. Thanks for sharing the concept.

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

frankraney wrote:

Gene is correct, but if you want a nodal slide, neewer has one, a 200mm on Amazon for 17.99. it is all metal and pretty good. I own one. I haven't seen others, but this is good quality.

Thanks, it is still there. I put it on my wish list while I ponder if I might prefer a shorter one. $18 is well under my limit for toys I might not actually use. And contactless even. Two or three clicks and it is here. Sparks joy.

MJPerini

The question has been adequately answered so the only thing I would add, is that if you are new to this, the simplest way to good results is an L-bracket with the camera in portrait position. I use a nodal slide, but modern software is more forgiving of precise alignment than software used to be. I have both RRS and import nodal slides, and both work fine.(A Nodal slide is more important if there are foreground elements in the picture) Start with just 3 frames, 1/3 overlap . Then try 5, 1/3 overlap, then try 7, 1/3 overlap. This will give you a good feel for the shape of the blended image, which you then need to crop.
Multi row is very powerful, but just a bit more complicated. Done carefully, you will be amazed at the quality that is possible. Enjoy, it is great fun.