Do you really need more than 20MP?? (Page 2): Definitely not a trick question. I'm trying to understand why if I'm taking a photo of a single object I intend to tightly crop why it...

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

CHG_CANON wrote:

If the same subject roughly fills the same 3:2 fra... (show quote)

Definitely not a trick question. I'm trying to understand why if I'm taking a photo of a single object I intend to tightly crop why it matters if the --OK maybe I stated it wrong. ALL things being equal when the shots were taken, and there were some way to count the number of pixels making up the SUBJECT only. would there be greater pixel density in the subject shot with a 45 mp camera than with a 24 mp camera?

OK I think I got it. More pixels on a sensor of the same physical size. ????????

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Curmudgeon wrote:

Definitely not a trick question. I'm trying to und... (show quote)

A cropped sensor and a full-frame sensor are not the same size as measured in square millimeters. Their relative pixel density can make them seem 'the same' in the resulting images. Up until the point you were cropping (cutting-down) your images to the same specific pixel resolution, the images might 'seem' the same when resized to the same pixel resolution, say the 45MP image resized to 24MP to match the D7200's sensor (image) resolution.

But, in their 1:1 pixel-level glory, the cropped-sensor, frame-filling subject over 24MP will not look the same as the full-frame, equivalent frame-filling subject over 45MP. A residential street with 6 cottages will not look the same as a 6-house street with 6 McMansions, even though both streets have 6 homes on six distinct lots. Though, from the post office, both are just 6 distinct delivery addresses, similar to how a pixel-based monitor just displays six pixels from either of these two 'streets'.

KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia

CHG_CANON wrote:

Here's an update on Gabby cat, presented in a quic... (show quote)

If anyone is happy with what they have... Good for them.

If anyone wants more megapixels, the sky is the limit... If they can afford the camera equipment and the computer to process/store.

Just avoid pictures of cats... Better avoid cats... Just viewing that picture has me sneezing!

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Paul, 20 Mp. is more than enough for lots of applications. I once owned a 4 Mp. Nikon D2X and I had no issues enlarging to pretty large sizes. Cameras like the Nikon D70s with its 6.2 Mp. also gave me beautiful enlargements.
My Olympus cameras have 17 Mp. except for the OM-5 Mk III that has 20. Do I see the difference in quality? No, I do not.

You know that many modern mirrorless cameras can generate images in the 40-50 Mp. range with their technologies. Unless enlarging to mural sizes it will not be very easy to see the difference and at mural sizes a lot of resolution is not necessary since those images are not seeing at close range.
I have beautiful enlargements from my 17 Mp. Olympus bodies.

The picture of the cat looks great to me and the enlargement is full of details.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Curmudgeon wrote:

Definitely not a trick question. I'm trying to und... (show quote)

I guess that I will state the obvious . . .
I "shoot loosely" (to crop later) when I'm in a hurry during a tour, or when I'm not sure just what my focal point will be or if there is more than "one picture" in a particular scene.
Sometimes, depending on the crop I may isolate several pics from one scene.
I also "shoot loosely" to provide "template material" for any of the different print sizes that may be required, such as . . . .
4x6
6x9
6.67x10
8x12
10x15
12x18
13.33x20
18x27
20x30
30x45
40x60 and so on. I realize that it may be deemed as a crutch, however, I find little difference in shooting loosely than a sports photog "spraying shots" to capture peak action.
I'm also guilty of that technique too.
In other words, it is just another tool in my kit bag.
Best Wishes,
JimmyT Sends

Edit: I always have Topaz Photo AI if I crop too deeply.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

camerapapi wrote:

Paul, 20 Mp. is more than enough for lots of appli... (show quote)

Just to confirm, that 'enlargement' was no enlargement at all. Rather, just a crop and presentation of the 1:1 pixel-level images of the same image above. It's the 'above' image that was resized down to 2048px wide for an online post. Although I've been lusting over the years for a 45MP upgrade, I've held off and lived with my cameras all in the 20 to 24MP range.

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

CHG_CANON wrote:

Just to confirm, that 'enlargement' was no enlargement at all. Rather, just a crop and presentation of the 1:1 pixel-level images of the same image above. It's the 'above' image that was resized down to 2048px wide for an online post. Although I've been lusting over the years for a 45MP upgrade, I've held off and lived with my cameras all in the 20 to 24MP range.

CHG: given the 2 pages of discussion in this thread and your earlier proposition, why lust for a 45mp upgrade?
Thanks.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

DaveyDitzer wrote:

CHG: given the 2 pages of discussion in this thread and your earlier proposition, why lust for a 45mp upgrade?
Thanks.

When I'm shooting airshows or wildlife, those cameras with the 24ish megapixels show their limits. I may get reasonable 'online sizes' that fill a digital frame, but those crops wouldn't print to larger sizes.

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

CHG_CANON wrote:

When I'm shooting airshows or wildlife, those cameras with the 24ish megapixels show their limits. I may get reasonable 'online sizes' that fill a digital frame, but those crops wouldn't print to larger sizes.

Thank you.

andesbill

A larger sensor (medium format, vs full frame, vs APSC, etc) tends to be better in low light, high ISO environments. Smaller sensors are also softer at higher f stops (above f11).
More MP’s allow you to crop closer with no loss in quality (depending on the use of the photo). So, for example, 40MP would act as a 2X lens with a 20MP crop, without changing lenses.

Larger sensors are more expensive, heavier and require heavier more expensive lenses.
There are trade offs no matter which choice you make.

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

CHG_CANON wrote:

Here's an update on Gabby cat, presented in a quic... (show quote)

The photographer makes the difference.. 20mp is good

andesbill

I’m currently reading The Photographer’s Vision Remastered by Michael Freeman. In the book, Freeman quotes American photographer William Albert Allard. Allard’s take is relevant here.
‘You’ve got to push yourself harder. You’ve got to start looking for pictures that nobody else could take. You’ve got to take the tools you have and probe deeper.”
I think that all of us here on UHH are trying to do just that.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

andesbill wrote:

I’m currently reading The Photographer’s Vision Remastered by Michael Freeman. In the book, Freeman quotes American photographer William Albert Allard. Allard’s take is relevant here.
‘You’ve got to push yourself harder. You’ve got to start looking for pictures that nobody else could take. You’ve got to take the tools you have and probe deeper.”
I think that all of us here on UHH are trying to do just that.

Many, but not all..........

therwol Loc: USA

CHG_CANON wrote:

Here's an update on Gabby cat, presented in a quic... (show quote)

I use my 20MP Canon G7X Mark II more than any other camera. 20MP and an outstanding lens is all I need most of the time. I use my Nikon D850 when I need to use a macro lens or a lens that goes beyond the range of the little camera. I also use it when I don't have a lens long enough for the situation. Cropping is a viable option. The small camera is convenient enough to take anywhere. The big camera is not. Can I see the difference in photos taken with the two cameras? Yes, but it is slight or difficult to discern on a computer screen and only becomes apparent on magnified or cropped images.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Jimmy T wrote:

I guess that I will state the obvious . . . br I ... (show quote)

Where's 8x10 and 7x5 ?