September 30, 2014, 02:02:07 PM

Author Topic: Why a high MP camera?  (Read 11030 times)

mb66energy

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2013, 04:55:08 AM »
Out of curiosity, those looking for high MP cameras... why do you need anything above 18MP?
What kind of pictures are you going to be printing or publishing that requires like 30MP and above?

(1) Extreme aspect ratios (cinemascope, ca. 2.35:1 or square)
     1-Shot-panoramas with moving objects/subjects
(2) Large prints for the wall
(3) Strange light sources (fireworks, Neon/LED light, sunsets) which will profit from a 2x2 binning
     to sum up R-G-G-B in one image pixel


I am shure that 12 MPix are sufficient for 90 % of the MY images, I really have to learn to master the 10MPix of my 40D.

But I dream about a 48 MPix FF camera with a RAW mode (or DPP "special buttons)) to calculate clean 24MPix and ultraclean 12MPix images.

But if it is possible to acquire more data I would prefer to use it. Consolidation of the 48MPix information into a 12MPix .cr2 data file with DPP or another post processing tool would be great: If 12MPix are sufficient, why store/operate with 48MPix files? On the other hand, if I have a good image where 48MPix are helpful ... it would be great to store the full information.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 05:14:18 AM by mb66energy »
TOOLS: EF-S 10-22 | 60 || EF 2.8/24 | 2.8/40* | 2.8 100 Macro* |2.0/100 | 4.0/70-200* | 5.6/400* || 2 x 40D | 600D | EOS M  [* most used lenses]

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2013, 04:55:08 AM »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4663
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #31 on: July 07, 2013, 06:23:41 AM »
Out of curiosity, those looking for high MP cameras... why do you need anything above 18MP?

18mp is (more than) enough for me as a final export size, *but* as a source this is what I'd like more mp for:

  • tele: if a ff would have the same pixel density as current crop plus a "crop thecenter" raw mode, you wouldn't need a crop camera plus the ff would have 100% af sensor coverage
  • macro (the lenses are sharp enough): more magnification w/o aperture drop, or crop for more working distance, less lens shade
  • aspect ratio change (like 16:9 or custom ar for dtp) from the same source
  • focus stacking or pano stitching: always results in a drop in resolution/sharpness, so higer mp source is better
  • general postprocessing: for me some actions like tilting, sharpening or nr work better if some downsizing is applied, i.e. the software has some more data to work with even if it's noisy or less sharp

chauncey

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 202
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #32 on: July 07, 2013, 07:29:19 AM »
Quote
•tele: if a ff would have the same pixel density as current crop plus a "crop the center" raw mode, you wouldn't need a crop camera plus the ff would have 100% af sensor coverage
•macro (the lenses are sharp enough): more magnification w/o aperture drop, or crop for more working distance, less lens shade
•aspect ratio change (like 16:9 or custom ar for dtp) from the same source
•focus stacking or pano stitching: always results in a drop in resolution/sharpness, so higher mp source is better
•general post processing: for me some actions like tilting, sharpening or nr work better if some downsizing is applied, i.e. the software has some more data to work with even if it's noisy or less sharp
The very fact that this question is being asked is showing a fundamental lack of understanding regarding the entire photographic process, ranging from the increased DOF (back-up and crop) to the superior IQ of a downsized high MP image.

kbmelb

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 131
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #33 on: July 07, 2013, 07:40:54 AM »

As far as high MP camera, I shoot for agencies and I actually catch flack from them for only shooting 22MP and I have probably lost jobs because I don't shoot medium format. I much prefer to shoot 35mm body. So if I can have a 30+MP camera I'll be quite happy. The agencies will probably still have something to complain about because they are MF snobs.
I have had those same idiotic request from some clients even though I know that the difference will be invisible. I scale up the images (5dmk3) strip the metadata and deliver thumping huge 16 bit tiffs and they are delighted. I also notice that a client recently supplied me with iStock images that were shot with a 7D and the kit lens! They got the job done (24x36 poster) but they were not as crisp as I expected of a stock agency and really got me thinking about the MP debate.
If your client wants to see you using high MP gear and is willing to pay a premium, just rent it, bill them and call it a day.

I actually work for a large health care provider. I am "their" photographer. Even have a contract. They want to use me for everything but they work with outside ad agencies and one of them resist using me with all their might. And one of the excuses they give my company is the resolution of my gear. This is obviously just an excuse to use THEIR guy.

I'd even go out on limb and say that agency has tried to sabotage shoots before just to get out of using me.

It really irks me because 95-100% of Victoria Secret catalogs, posters, billboards are shot with Canon gear and I doubt anyone is complaining about Russell James' resolution.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14523
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #34 on: July 07, 2013, 07:54:56 AM »
A few years ago a number of people said that 6MP is enough, now 18Mp
Can it be because Canon don't have any high megapixel camera??
24 Mp is the double resolution of 6Mp

A couple years ago, 12 MP was enough. Can it have been because Nikon didn't have an 'affordable' FX body with 21 MP?

 ::)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4663
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #35 on: July 07, 2013, 08:03:52 AM »
The very fact that this question is being asked is showing a fundamental lack of understanding regarding the entire photographic process, ranging from the increased DOF (back-up and crop) to the superior IQ of a downsized high MP image.

Ugh? That's a pretty self-confident statement, you're talking to me (since you quoted me, but I didn't ask a question) or the op?

A couple years ago, 12 MP was enough. Can it have been because Nikon didn't have an 'affordable' FX body with 21 MP? ::)

I'm sure the threads in the Nikon forums back then ("12 mp is enough, no one needs 21mp") are the same as from Canon loyalists now ("22mp is enough, no one needs 36mp")...

... of course the higher data rate (fps, storage) is a downside of more resolution, but my 2ct is that in secret most users would take more mp over less even if the downsized shots are no better than originals from the lower-mp body.

infared

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 933
  • Kodak Brownie!
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #36 on: July 07, 2013, 08:12:46 AM »
I find that the 5D3 is plenty of camera for me. Former pro...shoot for my own needs...art prints and gallery work...I waited to get into DSLR's until the 5D II came along, (And I owned all Nikon film cameras and lenses...so it took something fantastic to sway me). I felt that digital was finally "there there" with that offering..and "almost" affordable. LOL!
I got a 5D III because of the increased functionality of the camera...I have not regreted that expediture and it is all I really need for the work that I do. I am heavily into my photography..just picked up a 17mm TSE for my well-rounded quiver...amazing combo with the 5D III! Amazing. ...but I cannot see what a big MP camera can do for me at my level of shooting (which is advanced). I feel I have spent obscene amounts of $ to have the tools that I currently have...and the prints I am making do actually WOW people sometimes. So for this photographer...the expense of a newly relaseased Canon high-MP camera ($10,000+?) is just something I would not touch...plus having to completely overhaul my current (very adequate) computer setup to process and store these new mega files puts the cost factor out the window for me..for a small increase in quality for the type of work that "I" am doing.
I can see where certain pros and certain fine-arts shooters would be all over a camera like that...but I can also see that many of them have no "real" need for a camera of that nature for the work that they are doing.  It's a big commitment for most...but I think that Canon has to produce this camera. No doubt.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 08:17:47 AM by infared »
5D Mark III, Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Canon 17mm f/4L TS-E, Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS, 21mm f/2.8 Zeiss, Sigma 35mm f/1.4, 24-70mm f/2.8 II, 50mm f/1.4 Sigma Art, 85mm f/1.2L, 100mm f/2.8L Macro,70-200mm f/2.8L IS II...1.4x converter III, and some other stuff.....

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #36 on: July 07, 2013, 08:12:46 AM »

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #37 on: July 07, 2013, 08:28:54 AM »
I'm sure the threads in the Nikon forums back then ("12 mp is enough, no one needs 21mp") are the same as from Canon loyalists now ("22mp is enough, no one needs 36mp")...

Similar but not the same or even close. 12 -> 21 is a much bigger jump in system resolution than 22 -> 36, taking into account all other factors for resolution.

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #38 on: July 07, 2013, 09:57:52 AM »
I'm sure the threads in the Nikon forums back then ("12 mp is enough, no one needs 21mp") are the same as from Canon loyalists now ("22mp is enough, no one needs 36mp")...

Similar but not the same or even close. 12 -> 21 is a much bigger jump in system resolution than 22 -> 36, taking into account all other factors for resolution.
+1 Plus, it's the combinations of Cameras and Lenses that count so the difference of 22Mpixel Canon with top Canon lenses and 36Mpixel Nikon with top Nikon lenses is not so much according to DxO if I recall correctly. Sure D800 wins but not by much.

wellfedCanuck

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #39 on: July 07, 2013, 10:11:35 AM »
Yes, drooling should always be avoided or is that too big a generalization?

Depends - my camera is weather sealed, so if I'm using it with a weather sealed lens, a little DRool isn't a problem.  :P
I suspect that the pictures you've published of your photogear have generated all sorts of DRool...
Don't take my advice. Don't even take my advice not to take my advice.

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #40 on: July 07, 2013, 10:35:05 AM »
I'm sure the threads in the Nikon forums back then ("12 mp is enough, no one needs 21mp") are the same as from Canon loyalists now ("22mp is enough, no one needs 36mp")...

Similar but not the same or even close. 12 -> 21 is a much bigger jump in system resolution than 22 -> 36, taking into account all other factors for resolution.
+1 Plus, it's the combinations of Cameras and Lenses that count so the difference of 22Mpixel Canon with top Canon lenses and 36Mpixel Nikon with top Nikon lenses is not so much according to DxO if I recall correctly. Sure D800 wins but not by much.

There are Nikon lenses equal good as Canon, there are lenses from Sigma, Tamron etc
Put a good lens on a d800 and I guarantee that you will se a difference, the same difference IF Canon had a 36Mp camera today
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/%28lens1%29/886/%28lens2%29/175/%28brand1%29/Canon/%28camera1%29/795/%28brand2%29/Nikkor/%28camera2%29/792

I was thinking of the above DxO comparison:
Canon 5D3 with Canon 24-70 2.8 II and Nikon D800 with Nikon  AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 10:45:49 AM by tron »

Jay Khaos

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #41 on: July 07, 2013, 11:43:08 AM »
5DIII owners are arguing this point as if they are Macgyvers of photography who get the job done with the bare minimum... lol

There are plenty of uses for infinitely high megapixel counts.  Maybe not for weddings or casual shooting... but in general, you might accomplish the same shot with a cheaper/sharper lens and still have the freedom to frame what you want after the shot.  Working in advertising, I often reuse the same image for different purposes—some cropped in extremely close.  With retina displays coming on to the scene, high resolution isn't just for big prints. 

Also, for stock photography photos are priced by size (at least on istockphoto).  Not to say that most people NEED those big sizes... but as long as they will pay, I am a fan
5DIII | 85mm f1.2L • 70-200mm f2.8L IS II • 50mm f1.8 II

AlanF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #42 on: July 07, 2013, 01:02:42 PM »
Just visiting St Petersburg (full of Canon 70-200mm f/2.8) and thought that this from the The Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood (Russian: Церковь Спаса на Крови) illustrated nicely the effects of not having enough MP (taken with SX50 at 600mm equiv, iso 1250, 1/20s f/5.6).
5D III, 70D, Powershot SX50, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, 70-200/4 IS, 24-105, 15-85, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 150-600.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #42 on: July 07, 2013, 01:02:42 PM »

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #43 on: July 07, 2013, 01:19:44 PM »
5DIII owners are arguing this point as if they are Macgyvers of photography who get the job done with the bare minimum... lol

There are plenty of uses for infinitely high megapixel counts.  Maybe not for weddings or casual shooting... but in general, you might accomplish the same shot with a cheaper/sharper lens and still have the freedom to frame what you want after the shot.  Working in advertising, I often reuse the same image for different purposes—some cropped in extremely close.  With retina displays coming on to the scene, high resolution isn't just for big prints. 

Also, for stock photography photos are priced by size (at least on istockphoto).  Not to say that most people NEED those big sizes... but as long as they will pay, I am a fan
1st. You are being both rude and ignorant of the fact that not everyone needs a high megapixel camera. Your needs are NOT everyone's needs. The mere fact that you laugh at people who are satisfied with their 5DIII camera is ... funny to say the least...  Especially since NO ONE  said there shouldn't be a high megapixel camera.
2nd. You ignore the fact that lenses cannot resolve "infinite megapixels" Take a look at DxO for a change...
3rd. A cheaper/sharper lens. Mmmm interesting. With a few exceptions cheaper and sharper are mutually exclusive properties.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 01:21:35 PM by tron »

Faxon

  • Guest
Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #44 on: July 07, 2013, 02:56:29 PM »
I am not a pro still photographer. I am a pro video shooter (tv news), so I like fine equipment. The best part of the high resolution wars is the fact that guys like me can buy a beautiful 10 MP 1D Mk III for a fraction of it's original price, and get the world's best resolution five years ago. The rapidly evolving MP wars has it's benefits for bargain hunters.

My 8 MP 20D still makes beautiful macro photographs, and my "new" 1D will do the same, with all the enjoyment of using a top grade piece of equipment and getting comfortable with the best, without having to spend $6000.00. I will NEVER print anything larger than 8x10 and simply don't need more camera. Low light? That is why I might buy a 5D MkIII when the price drops in December.
 
Some classic film cameras are real cheap now as well, wonderful for the "perfect shot" type of measured, crafted photography, which I can certainly appreciate. Film Leicas, the unobtainable, will they EVER drop in price? I would not buy a digital Leica. Why would anyone? The MP count keeps passing them by.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 03:30:10 PM by Faxon »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why a high MP camera?
« Reply #44 on: July 07, 2013, 02:56:29 PM »