WELL this is about photography Will there be a difference in picture based on amount of pixels (10 meg verses 24 meg) ??
Most of my early digital photos were 800kb-2mb with my little waterproof Pentax. They look just as good on my screen as those of 24mb taken with my D750.
I have a 750 also, and several older point and shoot cameras. I agree with you....not much difference unless you blow them up to mural size. Then there would be a big difference.
I'm wondering about cropping (major)
Only when blown up (enlarged) ie. 8x10, 16x20, etc..
On a monitor, no.
larrylas wrote:
WELL this is about photography Will there be a difference in picture based on amount of pixels (10 meg verses 24 meg) ??
To understand the issue of 'resolution', you must understand the difference between 'pixel' and 'byte'. If you don't, you'll ask vague questions and receive misleading answers.
Resolution is properly understood as
pixel resolution. Pixel resolution is very simply the length by width of an image, measured in pixels, and typically divided by 1-million to express as
megapixel.
Therefore, an image at 6000x4000 is 24
megapixels or 24MP (6000 * 4000 / 1000000 = 24).
'Bytes' are a measure of storage. Bytes do not equal pixels. Pixels and bytes are not interchange terms, just a dark chocolate and 4.72 ounces are not interchangeable terms.
'Pixel' has a slightly different meaning in different contexts, but a pixel is generally thought of as the smallest single component of a digital image. As the smallest component of a digital image, a pixel is described by 'data' within the image file. That descriptive data has a storage size expressed in bytes. Images with more pixels contain more bytes making the files larger in size as expressed in bytes (or kilobytes or megabytes - MB). The data needed to describe a pixel varies based on the type of file and some techniques used to compress the storage size of this data. Therefore, you cannot take the pixel resolution and say with certainty how big (or small) the size in bytes of the file.
ELNikkor wrote:
Most of my early digital photos were 800kb-2mb with my little waterproof Pentax. They look just as good on my screen as those of 24mb taken with my D750.
'cause your screen is only 2MP.
ELNikkor wrote:
Most of my early digital photos were 800kb-2mb with my little waterproof Pentax. They look just as good on my screen as those of 24mb taken with my D750.
When the pixels in your image exceed the pixels in your screen, the image is resized to fit the screen.
Imagine your screen is 1920-pixels wide, a typical size today in February 2021. Your 24MP images are 6000-pixels wide. When you look at your 24MP image, you don't see the 6000 pixels along the width of a landscape aspect image. Rather, you see an image dynamically resized to fit to your 1920-pixel 'wide' screen.
To see the 'full glory' of your 24MP image at the original 1:1 (one to one) pixel level details, display the image on these new 8K TVs like the Samsung 72-inch 8K UHD that can display at 7680x4320 pixels.
More discussion of pixel resolution and screen display and file size is presented in this discussion, along with several pictorial examples:
Recommended resizing parameters for digital images
larrylas wrote:
WELL this is about photography Will there be a difference in picture based on amount of pixels (10 meg verses 24 meg) ??
It depends on so many other factors. One could answer that "all other things being equal" yes. However, all things are NEVER equal." Not ever. As in I have never seen any comparison of any two or more items where everything but one item was actually equal. Not once. Never.
It is sort of like using DxOMARK results as the primary data in choosing a camera. They only test one or two elements (sensors and lenses) in controlled environments that tell you little about what our results will be when you use it for whatever it is you do.
People tend to forget that cameras are systems, not a collection of parts.
Side note: One of the reasons I have settled in the Canon world is Canon never forgets they are building systems for ranges of use and users. That is why they have done things like focus on lenses when getting into FF Mirrorless cameras. This told there base, "We know you use cameras to get results, we are committed to giving you the whole package, not just the bells and whistles."
whfowle
Loc: Tampa first, now Albuquerque
The difference between a 10 megapixel and a 24 megapixel image may or may not become visible depending on how you view it. Do you plan to view it on an iPad or make an A1 print or maybe a wall mural. Also how far away you view it will determine whether you will see a difference.
larrylas wrote:
WELL this is about photography Will there be a difference in picture based on amount of pixels (10 meg verses 24 meg) ??
Yes! All things being EQUAL, Yes there will.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-501318-1.html
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
larrylas wrote:
WELL this is about photography Will there be a difference in picture based on amount of pixels (10 meg verses 24 meg) ??
Yes, when printed the higher resolution prints will have better detail capture. At typical screen resolutions, the difference will really only be there when you zoom in on the image. Keep in mind that a 4K screen is only 8.8 mp, and a standard HD screen - 1920x1080 is only 2 mp, so you will never see the higher resolution of a higher mp image unless you zoom, and that a 2 mp image will completely fill an HD screen.
Aside from this, higher MP cameras tend to have wider dynamic range than lower ones, and newer cameras tend to have lower noise and wider dynamic range that older ones, even if they have the same number of pixels. These are broad generalizations, but your question is a broad one.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.