Dose sensor resolution matter to anyone other than a photographer?
Mar 28, 2024 10:08:04 #
Mar 28, 2024 10:16:31 #
DRM
Loc: NC
CHG_CANON wrote:
For most everyone, pixel resolution at 20MP is mor... (show quote)
Generally agree. I'm almost exclusively a landscape photographer, aside from an all-too-infrequent trip to Yellowstone, Everglades, or similarly wildlife rich location. I regularly sell 24x36 metal prints of images made with the Canon 5D (12mp), 5Dii (20), 5Diii (22), and 5Div (30). Quality of the 5D and 5Dii images is, of course, less than those from the 5Diii and especially the 5Div; that seems to be much more obvious to me than to most customers, however. Files from the lesser cameras require more careful processing, and shooting with those models was more limiting than with the 5Div (or with my current R5). Particularly in low light situations where bumping ISO is now second nature, doing so with earlier models often resulted in completely unusable files.
I could probably sell just as many metal landscapes if I was still shooting the 5Div. I wouldn't want to trade my R5 for any of the 5D models, though--even the 5Div--but my mirrorless affinity has far more to do with mirrorless technological advances, much less to do with megapixel count. For my work, a 30mp sensor is almost always more than adequate. But when an occasional customer orders an over-sized metal print--40x60, 36x72, 40x80, etc.--it is nice to have 45mp files with which to work. Depending on the specific image, I might try those sizes with 5Div files, but absolutely would not with files from any of the 5Div's predecessors.
Mar 28, 2024 10:29:56 #
DaveyDitzer wrote:
I am planning a specific landscape photo shoot which is 300 miles away (summer home location). I plan to capture a shot that I can have printed to a large final size (ca. 30x36). For this I'm taking my D850 and several lenses on a hike to make sure the resolution can work for this large print size. My other FF body is 16 mp. So the 46mp of the D850 seems to make sense for me in this situation.
A print that large would have a normal viewing distance of about 3 feet regardless of which camera you used.
You have little control over how close anyone gets to the finished image but anything closer than about 3 feet would be a lot like pixel peeping.
If your other camera is as light as a Df you might try the scene with the same lens on both bodies.
Unless the viewer is also a photographer and you mention the MP of the camera, they may not get close to look at the details.
The ppi at 36 inches for 46MP is 230, for 16MP it's 138. If the viewer gets within 2 feet of the print they might start to see a difference if their eyesight is good.
But if the image is good enough, they are less likely to move in. They might just stay back and take the whole thing in.
Mar 28, 2024 10:30:48 #
Mar 28, 2024 10:32:38 #
Canisdirus wrote:
For the viewer...and for the photographer...the bigger the sensor...the more options there are...better chances of making that stellar image.
Only the photographer has options. When looking at a print, the viewer has no options other than to pull out a loupe.
Mar 28, 2024 10:35:18 #
Longshadow wrote:
NO. Not once the final print is made and displayed.
The viewer will either like it or not.
Nit-pickers, pixel peepers, those obsessed may wonder though.
But not the "normal" person viewing the image.
NO. Not once the final print is made and displayed.
The viewer will either like it or not.
Nit-pickers, pixel peepers, those obsessed may wonder though.
But not the "normal" person viewing the image.
Mar 28, 2024 10:38:48 #
DRM wrote:
my mirrorless affinity has far more to do with mirrorless technological advances, much less to do with megapixel count. For my work, a 30mp sensor is almost always more than adequate.
Exactly my sentiments.
The most rabid MP advocates have probably never made a large print from any medium. They just think that more MP might help if they ever get around to it - some day, if ever.
Mar 28, 2024 10:39:31 #
selmslie wrote:
I didn't pixel peep to develop either of these shots. This time I am showing only the 4k version of each because the sharpness is indistinguishable unless I pixel peep.
Their size is slightly different because I was a little closer for the Z7 shot.
Both were taken at f/5.6 - more DOF and more detail than for the initial example.
Their size is slightly different because I was a little closer for the Z7 shot.
Both were taken at f/5.6 - more DOF and more detail than for the initial example.
But I'm looking at the END RESULT...
The number of pixels does not matter to me.
But it does to the photographer.
With TWO images, yes, I can make a comparison, with one I can't.
Do most photographers print two????
Mar 28, 2024 10:49:52 #
DRM
Loc: NC
selmslie wrote:
A print that large would have a normal viewing dis... (show quote)
Personally agree with all that. One printing limitation with my own lower mp files is that I always print at 300ppi, no matter the dimensions of the print in inches. That's the recommendation from my favored print labs (though one of them acknowledges that they will accept files at 200ppi), so I dutifully adhere to their parameters.
Interesting regarding your mention of other photographers. My space in one particular gallery has 18 metal prints on the wall, in typical speculative sizes of 20x30, 24x36, and 20x40. One of the 18 is a 24x36 print from a 35mm slide. Particularly if a visitor to the gallery mentions being into photography, I often ask them to ID for me the one print that came from film. It becomes a fun exercise for most people, but no one has ever yet correctly identified the film print on the first guess. Perhaps my visitors/potential customers are not very knowledgeable or sophisticated photographers, but I think lacking intimate knowledge of the equipment involved makes a huge difference in the ability of many people to assess (and perceive) image quality. Or lack thereof.
Mar 28, 2024 12:00:53 #
Resolution matters…but as note it isn't because of ability to see a difference on screen or a print from the whole image. It matters because it allows you to crop more so to increase the size of the subject (like distant wildlife) in the output without losing output quality because of the lower pixels on duck (POD) number. There are other issues…noise and such…with cropping but POD is the real reason for higher MP sensors.
Mar 28, 2024 12:23:01 #
DRM wrote:
But when an occasional customer orders an over-sized metal print--40x60, 36x72, 40x80, etc.--it is nice to have 45mp files with which to work.
If you anticipate needing the extra megapixels there is an alternative that is much less expensive than a high megapixel body, a stitched panorama.
I used PTgui to stitch the three raw files together, saved the result as a 16-bit TIFF and adjusted the brightness in Capture One.
Mar 28, 2024 12:25:41 #
selmslie wrote:
If you anticipate needing the extra megapixels there is an alternative that is much less expensive than a high megapixel body, a stitched panorama.
I used PTgui to stitch the three raw files together, saved the result as a 16-bit TIFF and adjusted the brightness in Capture One.
I used PTgui to stitch the three raw files together, saved the result as a 16-bit TIFF and adjusted the brightness in Capture One.
A scenic beauty 🎯🎯🎯
Mar 28, 2024 12:43:46 #
joecichjr wrote:
A scenic beauty 🎯🎯🎯
Hardly that, but it was handy.
Mar 28, 2024 12:53:47 #
DaveyDitzer
Loc: Western PA
DRM wrote:
. Perhaps my visitors/potential customers are not very knowledgeable or sophisticated photographers, but I think lacking intimate knowledge of the equipment involved makes a huge difference in the ability of many people to assess (and perceive) image quality. Or lack thereof.
Is the print from a slide one from Kodachrome 25?
Mar 28, 2024 13:27:59 #
selmslie wrote:
If it sounds like a provocative question, it was i... (show quote)
Resolution is EVERYTHING when you're cropping small features. It is amazing the difference between a Sony A7R V (61MP) and A7 III (24MP) in this regard; the reason I use the A7R V for astrophotography.
bwa
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.