Informal poll: What 61MP body do you use ? (Page 22): True about the cropping, sometimes you are out walking and stumble upon a cool shot that's far away that you'd like to post on...

Mwilliamsphotography Loc: Royal Oak Michigan & Palm Harbor Florida

imagextrordinair wrote:

But...

what good is your 61 megapixels if you only view your image on a monitor, or post them on social media?

Lotsa' pixels are only adventitious for large printing or a cropping advantage... and nothing else.

Your nice 61 Sony image posted on FB is only 6 megapixels in size after you prepossess it...

True about the cropping, sometimes you are out walking and stumble upon a cool shot that's far away that you'd like to post on social media, but only have a 55mm lens on your 61 meg camera.

"A Pandemonium of Parrots" Sony A7C-R, Zeiss 55/1.8

(Download)

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Mwilliamsphotography wrote:

True about the cropping, sometimes you are out walking and stumble upon a cool shot that's far away that you'd like to post on social media, but only have a 55mm lens on your 61 meg camera.

"A Pandemonium of Parrots" Sony A7C-R, Zeiss 55/1.8

It sure would be a pandemonium - and it's arresting and eye catching 💚💚💚

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Mwilliamsphotography wrote:

True about the cropping, sometimes you are out walking and stumble upon a cool shot that's far away that you'd like to post on social media, but only have a 55mm lens on your 61 meg camera.

"A Pandemonium of Parrots" Sony A7C-R, Zeiss 55/1.8

It's like having Gold in a lock box. It can be cashed in at anytime for any reason!

Mwilliamsphotography Loc: Royal Oak Michigan & Palm Harbor Florida

Retired CPO wrote:

It's like having Gold in a lock box. It can be cashed in at anytime for any reason!

Good way of describing it.

Plus, using Bluetooth or WiFi connectivity with a smart phone or tablet/iPad, it's easy to immediately transfer an image, edit it, and post a jpeg on social media.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

Are all you waiting for the 100 megapixels coming in the near future? Not me I want at least 137 megapixels

User ID

davyboy wrote:

Are all you waiting for the 100 megapixels coming in the near future? Not me I want at least 137 megapixels

WAITING ?!? Crawl iout from under your rock and look around :-) Ive had 80MP on hand for years and this year bumped up to 100MP. Its not exotic or expensive either.

Those numbers are for two entirely different cameras, not the evolution of one model line. Still have both.

Neither camera was acquired for any routine need for very high MPs. Each has its far more useful atributes for which Ive chose it. Those ultra high MPs have occasionally been handy, but likely 50MP is more than plenty sufficient.

Joecosentino Loc: Whitesboro, New York

none, I like larger pixels to collect more light and improve contrast in the photo, I shoot 24mp. 99.9% of the time, Once in a while I take out my old V1 it's 10mp I think, and there is something about the those images that larger MP just don't have.

User ID

Joecosentino wrote:

none, I like larger pixels to collect more light and improve contrast in the photo, I shoot 24mp. 99.9% of the time, Once in a while I take out my old V1 it's 10mp I think, and there is something about the those images that larger MP just don't have.

Even if its only 10(?)MP, the V1 pixels are waaaaay smaller than higher MP cameras of normal size. First you say you love big pixels, then you say you found love in the V1 ?!?!?!? Well, love *IS* strange, and usually illogical !

Bottom line is that a low MP count in no way indicates large pixels all on its own. All tiny sensors have tiny pixels (photosites).

Mwilliamsphotography Loc: Royal Oak Michigan & Palm Harbor Florida

Joecosentino wrote:

none, I like larger pixels to collect more light and improve contrast in the photo, I shoot 24mp. 99.9% of the time, Once in a while I take out my old V1 it's 10mp I think, and there is something about the those images that larger MP just don't have.

24 meg full frame sensor is a sort of sweet spot for 35mm sized digital ... most legacy lenses can perform to that degree of resolution. Plus, most needs of the "average shooter" rarely require a greater meg count.

The notion that larger photo sites deliver some magical performance was born from Medium Format digital backs as 645 sized sensors increased from 25 meg to 40, to 60 then to 100 meg. The 25 meg backs DID have a look to them that many found special.

What has become apparent is that the high meg sensors have been refined and improved, camera hardware has gotten better, lenses have been updated, the processing software significantly improved, and computer software and processing power improved exponentially. This makes 61+ meg very useable in almost every situation, while improving color fidelity and the flexibility of use to fit every need.

I have and use 3 different 61 meg cameras, and a 40 meg Medium Format camera. The Medium Format still outperforms the 61 meg cameras in sheer image quality.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Joecosentino wrote:

none, I like larger pixels to collect more light and improve contrast in the photo, I shoot 24mp. 99.9% of the time, Once in a while I take out my old V1 it's 10mp I think, and there is something about the those images that larger MP just don't have.

I think you have a valid point.... My most distinctive photos have been shot on my DSC-R1 which was Sony's first bridge camera and it had a fantastic Zeiss zoom on it. Only 10 MP but the large pixels and the micro contrast of the Zeiss are incomparable...

User ID

MrBob wrote:

I think you have a valid point.... My most distinctive photos have been shot on my DSC-R1 which was Sony's first bridge camera and it had a fantastic Zeiss zoom on it. Only 10 MP but the large pixels and the micro contrast of the Zeiss are incomparable...

Those pixels would be about the same size as a typical 24MP FF from a few tears ago. Lately we usually find 24MP sensors are BSI so pixels are effectively bigger at the aame density. My 9 yr old 24 MP Sony uses a (still less common today) stacked BSI sensor.

IOW the old R1 does not feature larger pixels (photosites) but Im in no way doubting your impression of its picture quality. It is what it is, regardless of all the techie stuff.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

User ID wrote:

Those pixels would be about the same size as a typical 24MP FF from a few tears ago. Lately we usually find 24MP sensors are BSI so pixels are effectively bigger at the aame density. My 9 yr old 24 MP Sony uses a (still less common today) stacked BSI sensor.

IOW the old R1 does not feature larger pixels (photosites) but Im in no way doubting your impression of its picture quality. It is what it is, regardless of all the techie stuff.

From what I have been reading of late 24 MP is about perfect for a FF sensor according to some... The R1 has 10.3 Mp and is a CMOS type device about APS-C size. I can't really say WHAT specific quality of this body renders such distinctive images but I think it is a RARE combination of the superb micro contrast of the Zeiss and what ever magic is in the sensor. There is a certain " different " look from today's mega sensor bodies... I think this capture kind of shows what is hard to describe. Check out the contrast delineation on the rock outcropping in DL.

(Download)

BebuLamar

I use the Nikon Df. Oops. I make a mistake I thought it's 16 instead of 61MP.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

Mwilliamsphotography wrote:

24 meg full frame sensor is a sort of sweet spot f... (show quote)

If you think 61 megapixels is magic just wrap your mind around 143 megapixels

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

MrBob wrote:

From what I have been reading of late 24 MP is abo... (show quote)

The place to sit and absorb the beauty would be right where you took the shot (Unless you were hanging on for dear life

) Just beautiful and serene ⭐⭐💎⭐⭐