Shellback Loc: North of Cheyenne Bottoms Wetlands - Kansas

Hmmm - as far as I know, the only time a reduction in mp happens is when you are shooting a ff and have it set to dx mode

Jerry G Loc: Waterford, Michigan and Florida

Yes, according to DXO the apparent resolution is 8 mps. It seems digital sensor resolution has surpassed lens resolution. Here is a link to a few comparisons of lenses on different cameras.
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D-on-Nikon-D800E-versus-AF-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4D-on-Nikon-D3400-versus-AF-S-DX-Nikkor-18-55mm-f-3.5-5.6G-VR-on-Nikon-D3400__198_814_198_1105_159_1105

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I have to find the procedure for measuring the sharpness in terms of pixels. What WERE the sharpness units before? When did they change them and who changed them?

Does that mean that before digital, sharpness was measured in <film grain> grains per inch?

Still a non-believer in this connotation.

So there is no point in getting a 30Mp camera as there are no lenses good enough to utilize that high of resolution?

Jerry G Loc: Waterford, Michigan and Florida

I read about their new method and it seems logical, it takes into account the resolution of the lens and pixel size. FF sensors of 24 mps are capable of higher resolution than crop sensor cameras of 24mps with the same lens, the acceptable circle of confusion of crop sensor cameras is smaller, meaning focus is more critical with smaller sensors.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Northrup is entertaining and charismatic, I suppose. However, some of the stuff he says borders on misinformation. Specifically, his method of using analogies between photography concepts, yet failing to make it clear that it is merely an analogy, and not a direct, actual relationship. In this particular case, lenses and megapixels! A knowledgeable, experienced photographer generally will understand what Northrup is attempting to communicate, but a newbie will likely take Northrup's statements too literally and get the wrong idea.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Wouldn't remember where you read it so I can read it, would you?
I'd like to compare the two methods.

CO

When I first read your post, I thought you said chick-bait. I was wondering what he does to get women to look at his videos. I think you're right about him though.

Jerry G Loc: Waterford, Michigan and Florida

Somewhere on the DXO website, I could not find it again.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

I’ve never used that particular kit lens, but anyone telling you that this kit lens is as good as the best prime lens is in need of a reality check.

First of all, it isn’t Tony, the info comes from DXO Mark.

To make it clear, you always get your 24mp file, but think of driving a Ferrari around a track as fast as you can using winter studded tires, instead of slicks. You can go around the track either way, but your time is going to be very different. So if all you a trying to do is drive around the track without worrying about the time, your kit lens is fine. But if you want to try to beat the record, purchase the best lens you can afford

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Would you provide a link to that Youtube video? I have searched Tony's Youtube pages and could not find the video you are quoting.
Personally, I think Tony's reviews are pretty good and fair. I'd like to see that video.

bobishkan Loc: Fort Myers Sunny Florida

Link is www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmWBW8aZSSO D3300 Overview Tutorial Tony Northrup

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Personally I find Tony and Chelsea to be quite entertaining, and occasionally informative. Tony has a bad habit of saying things that are easily misinterpreted or just stupid. I remember in one of their videos they were discussing the chronological development of digital cameras. Right around 1999 or so, Sony introduced a most revolutionary digital camera for the available technology, the Mavica CD series. Since micro storage as still quite crude at that time, a great alternative was the mini compact disc, so that was Sony's solution of the day. I bought a Mavica CD-300 to record one of my daughters high school graduation, class of 2000. The camera has 3 megapixels of resolution and it could record, if recall serves me correctly, around 160 images on a 3 inch CD. I actually found the camera in its bag with all its accessories just the other day. Plugged it in and it still works. Anyway, during their podcast, Tony said some fairly mean things about the camera and the people that owned them and not only did he say he never used one but wasn't all that familiar with them. Well Mr. Know it all about all things photographic, if you never used one then how the hell can you review or diss one!? Jerk! Yeah, by today's standards, the Sony CD cameras were quite the unique animal, but they were packed with available technology and most importantly, they worked. As for Tony Northrup, I still watch the Northrup's. Like I said, they are entertaining. I even own their photography book, it's not bad. I even bought a lens from them, a brand new Canon EF 24-105 f/4L for $500. They likes the Sigma art version better and had duplicates, so they offered the lens for a decent price, at the time, and I bought it. Still have it, still use it, like the version II better.

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

He's wrong, and one of the reasons I think he is a clown and shouldn't be taken all that seriously.

He is misquoting DXOMark's ratings and totally not understanding the concept of perceptual megapixels.

Using DXO's metric requires that you understand it is a relative metric which addresses perceived sharpness, which cannot be measured directly anyway. Sharpness is composed of acuity and contrast. The combination of the two provide a perception of sharpness. Add to that mix eyesight, print size or viewing medium, viewing distance, etc and you will quickly see that most methods to assess "sharpness" are inadequate.

What DXO Mark's P-Mp metric does is evaluate a particular lens on a particular camera, and compares the performance to a lens that is "perfect" on that camera. So, if your camera is 24 mp but the P-Mp is only 9, this means that the image produced by the combination will be no "sharper" than if you had used a perfect lens on a 9 mp camera. This is not an easy concept to get your head around but this may help.

https://petapixel.com/2012/12/17/perceptual-megapixel-mtf-charts-boiled-down-to-a-single-number/

One of the interesting takeaways is the last sentence in the article which states, "DxOMark writes that though using this new metric, they have confirmed that a 12-megapixel full-frame camera is sharper than an 18-megapixel APS-C camera." - which explains why I always thought my D700 and D3S were "sharper" than my associate's D7200, using the same lens.

This matter was covered here in this link:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-377405-4.html

Where I specifically asked DXO about Northrup's representations - and DXO's response shot down each and every one.

So much for being an expert with videos and books to one's credit.

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

But worse, that people are lured into believing the crap that they read - and stop thinking critically - or worse, go into full denial of reality, descending into the world of Fake.

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

I addressed this video in my contact with DXO where they debunked most of what he said.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-377405-4.html