POLL: How many mp do you want anyway?

[Marsu42]

Re: To Marsu42, re: m/s-RAW modes

I've read other references you've made to m- and/or sRAW modes in previous threads, and I'm curious to know if you are using the term "cooked" as a pejorative.

Nope, I just just the term as a marker that these "raw" files aren't "direct" sensor data, nor simple pixel binning, but modified along the way according to Canon's secret recipe - which seems to vary from camera to camera, which is probably why dxo doesn't support m/s-raw.

Afaik the major drawback to be aware of is that these "raw" formats don't have lossless wb adjustment anymore, one of the main advantages of shooting "raw" in the first place: http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/image_compression/file_types_raw_sraw_and_jpeg.do

http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/#sraw
http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13916
https://www.kolja-engelmann.de/blog/2013/05/canons-raw-mraw-und-sraw-format/

If s/m-raw is the opportune format to do the job that's great, personally I'd rather shoot full raw and then convert to lossy dng (there are also downsized lossy dng options in Adobe's dng converter) as this doesn't appear to be as "black box" to me.

 

[SDFilmFan]

The biggest printer I use (at my local Costco) is 12" by 18" at 300 ppi, for a native 19.4 MP. So, theoretically my 5D3 is already overkill, and my SL1 is almost there. But that assumes no cropping. If I want to cut just 20% off of width and height, I'd need 30.4 MP to avoid interpolating. More than that if I want to run and gun and shoot wide and recompose in post to move the central focus point to a rule-of-thirds node.

No you wouldn't, with today's printers and their dithering and rasterizing algorithms 300dpi is complete overkill, besides, I don't believe there is a printer with a native 300dpi so all your data is dithered anyway.

Do a test, take a test image and then get it printed at 320dpi, down sample to 300dpi, do the same at 240dpi then see for yourself. Most people can't see a difference until around 200dpi.

Actually, we did this test as part of photography class I took, printing the same photo at a variety of resolutions. We saw improvement as resolution increased up to 300 ppi (not dpi), and no improvement past that. Since then, I've believed the techs running the printers as to what the optimum resolution is.

 

[sdsr]

You need to tweak the choices a bit - it's the a7s that's 12MP, not the a7r (someone may have pointed this out already).

Anyway, it's hard to say. I own three FF cameras - 6D (20MP), a7r (36) and a7s (12) - and most of the time any of them is more than good enough for my purposes in all sorts of ways, including resolution. I was bowled over by the images obtainable via the a7r when I first bought it and still am and perhaps the similar quality in 50MP would be even more appealing for cropping purposes (not to mention the the sheer pleasure of peering closely and finding details you didn't realize were there). But at the other extreme there's much to be said for the a7s with it's 12MP, and the difference in processing speed and resulting file size is far from subtle (with the 6D somewhere in between); and when you throw in such bonuses as a completely silent shutter and being able to easily use a very good f/.95 lens on a really low noise sensor it becomes more appealing still. Plus, I prefer small and mirrorless.

In other words, to state the obvious, mere resolution isn't dispositive. If someone (I guess we'll have to wait longer for Canon to do it) were to conjure up a camera with >36MP sensor + mirrorless + smallish + at least a7s noise performance + IBIS, I would certainly be interested. (Unless something magically weird happens between 36 and 50 MP, worries about lens performance seem unfounded - all manner of lenses, new and old, perform superbly on 36MP.) I expect the new Canon dslrs will be great, but they're not for me, regardless of how many MP they have.

 

[JonAustin]

Re: To Marsu42, re: m/s-RAW modes

I've read other references you've made to m- and/or sRAW modes in previous threads, and I'm curious to know if you are using the term "cooked" as a pejorative.

Nope, I just just the term as a marker that these "raw" files aren't "direct" sensor data, nor simple pixel binning, but modified along the way according to Canon's secret recipe - which seems to vary from camera to camera, which is probably why dxo doesn't support m/s-raw.

Afaik the major drawback to be aware of is that these "raw" formats don't have lossless wb adjustment anymore, one of the main advantages of shooting "raw" in the first place: http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/image_compression/file_types_raw_sraw_and_jpeg.do

http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/#sraw
http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13916
https://www.kolja-engelmann.de/blog/2013/05/canons-raw-mraw-und-sraw-format/

If s/m-raw is the opportune format to do the job that's great, personally I'd rather shoot full raw and then convert to lossy dng (there are also downsized lossy dng options in Adobe's dng converter) as this doesn't appear to be as "black box" to me.

Thanks for your response and for the links. As you've noted, Canon uses a "secret recipe" for producing the m- and sRAW files. I confess that the implications of the lack of "lossless WB adjustment" are lost on me, as these files open and "behave" in PS and Lightroom identically to "native" RAW, as far as I can tell. But I haven't read the linked articles yet ... I will do so!

 

[Spiros Zaharakis]

Actually, we did this test as part of photography class I took, printing the same photo at a variety of resolutions. We saw improvement as resolution increased up to 300 ppi (not dpi), and no improvement past that. Since then, I've believed the techs running the printers as to what the optimum resolution is.

I also did that very same test also on a photography class and most people had a hard time find the difference between the 200ppi and the 30ppi prints.
Most of the viewers could not tell any difference between prints of 120ppi and above from a distance of 50cm and most found the 150ppi prints to be acceptable even in close viewing distance.
At 1m even the 72ppi image looked acceptable.
However there is a big difference between capture resolution and print resolution, No matter the print size higher capture resolution will give you more image detail regardless.
The difference is similar to 4k video downscaled to 1080 compared to native 1080p footage.
My opinion is that higher resolution can be very useful sometimes and it's good to have a camera that can offer you that when you need it.

 

[Crosswind]

around 10mp (...I'm not kidding)

Hi, im new at canonrumors.com. Great stuff to read over here

If I could choose, I'd like to have a medium format sensor with 10 or 12 Megapixels, specifically designed for low-light-shootings, seriously.

I shoot a lot in the night and do panoramas. Excellent high-iso performance, large sensor, large pixels - and 10 mp would be more than enough for my purposes, 'cause after stitching the images are usually between 100 or 200 mp's anyway.

I just wish that I had extraordinary big pixels so I can stop down my (prime-)lenses to get even better performance and still have very clean images with ISO 102400 for example... or to be able to use much shorter exposure times.

Now, I mostly shoot with ISO 3200, f2.0 and around 14-15 secs with my 35mm prime. But my Canon EOS 6D is good enough for basically anything in low light, except beyond ISO 6400. Well, people's needs are very different. Can't wait for the 6D mark II version. I expect it to have around 24 or 26 Megapixels, but I wish it would go down instead of going up

Hope for a significant improvement in high-iso-performance, no matter what's inside.


cheers

btw. I'm from Austria and my english isn't really perfect, so... excuse me

P.S.: And even 12 or 15 megapixels would be more than enough for most people imo.

 

[JonAustin]

Re: around 10mp (...I'm not kidding)

Hi, im new at canonrumors.com. Great stuff to read over here

If I could choose, I'd like to have a medium format sensor with 10 or 12 Megapixels, specifically designed for low-light-shootings, seriously.

I shoot a lot in the night and do panoramas. Excellent high-iso performance, large sensor, large pixels - and 10 mp would be more than enough for my purposes, 'cause after stitching the images are usually between 100 or 200 mp's anyway.

I just wish that I had extraordinary big pixels so I can stop down my (prime-)lenses to get even better performance and still have very clean images with ISO 102400 for example... or to be able to use much shorter exposure times.

Now, I mostly shoot with ISO 3200, f2.0 and around 14-15 secs with my 35mm prime. But my Canon EOS 6D is good enough for basically anything in low light, except beyond ISO 6400. Well, people's needs are very different. Can't wait for the 6D mark II version. I excpect it to have around 24 or 26 Megapixels, but I wish it would go down instead of going up Hope for a significant improvement in high-iso-performance, no matter what's inside.


cheers

btw. I'm from Austria and my english isn't really perfect, so... excuse me

May I be the first to welcome you to the Canon Rumors forum, and -- as a native English speaker who speaks German as a second language -- I think your English is excellent.

 

[sjprg]

Karlpeddel: Its obvious that you do not have an extensive knowledge of ADCs and maybe less of binary math.

 

[NancyP]

3,201 MP! That's 1 MP more than the new telescope imaging facility being built in Chile. ;D

 

[expatinasia]

I want as many as will best future proof my work for the longest possible time.

I remember when people were saying there was no need to shoot in Full HD, now everyone is clambering for 4K and we are already talking about 8k and up.

So it's not really what I want, but what will work best for all those fancy toys many of us want to buy in the future.

 

[keemikpoiss]

I felt that 22 MP (as provided by my current highest pixel count camera) or even 15 MP (as provided by my current highest pixel density camera) will be sufficient for my needs and wants for a long time. I say that considering the "ecosystem" I see myself working with in the next several years. I may have one or two lenses that significantly out-resolve these cameras under ideal setting but only one of these lenses does it over a broad range of f-stops and off-center areas. I am not really in a position to afford or even justify lenses such as Carl Zeiss Otus 1.4/55 any time soon.

In terms of output, I just upgraded my display to a rather nice IPS QHD monitor but my typical crops are still larger than the display can fit at 100%. It has been very long time since I had to blame low pixel resolution to blurry prints; the issue is usually between the camera and the ground. In a few cases where I suspect the result will be printed large (The largest I have printed was 39x19 on three sheets) I will shoot panoramic and stitch.

In general, I am for fewer, bigger, cleaner pixels and better dynamic range. More than once I wished I could have taken a single shot rather than rely on HDR with all its motion-related problems.

 

[Cet]

I voted for 50 MP (on a FF) as I love to "dive" into the picture when looking at it at 100% and see details that were not visible for my eyes. It gives me a lot of room for cropping and it gives me a lot of reach in the form of "digital zoom", so with a prime lens I can have the same effect as with a zoom lens.

I have to correct myself, I did not meant "digital zoom" as this implies enlarging the picture beyond 100% by using interpolation of pixels with subsequent loss of image quality (therefore I never go beyond 100%) but I meant zooming into the picture by simply cropping.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

1 more than whatever they deliver ;D

(and oh what a critical 1 that will be)

 

[Marsu42]

Re: around 10mp (...I'm not kidding)

Hi, im new at canonrumors.com. Great stuff to read over here

Willkommen, something seems to be wrong with German-speaking forums lately, more people showing up around here ... personally I chose CR because an international community is so much more versatile and interesting than just one's own country.

btw. I'm from Austria and my english isn't really perfect, so... excuse me

There's a surprisingly high amount of non-native speakers here, so don't worry - though still some simply assume you pay in $ and live in the center of the universe (the US, that is ).

Hi, im new at canonrumors.com. Great stuff to reaIf I could choose, I'd like to have a medium format sensor with 10 or 12 Megapixels, specifically designed for low-light-shootings, seriously.

This indeed seems to be a market, and Canon certainly has ultra-low light sensors in their security cams. But Canon dslr is so mainstream that I somehow doubt that they'll release something for these people esp. as they would have to divide sales with the Sony a7s. Sony seems to be quicker at servicing into market niches.

 

[scyrene]

Re: around 10mp (...I'm not kidding)

Hi, im new at canonrumors.com. Great stuff to read over here

If I could choose, I'd like to have a medium format sensor with 10 or 12 Megapixels, specifically designed for low-light-shootings, seriously.

I shoot a lot in the night and do panoramas. Excellent high-iso performance, large sensor, large pixels - and 10 mp would be more than enough for my purposes, 'cause after stitching the images are usually between 100 or 200 mp's anyway.

I just wish that I had extraordinary big pixels so I can stop down my (prime-)lenses to get even better performance and still have very clean images with ISO 102400 for example... or to be able to use much shorter exposure times.

Now, I mostly shoot with ISO 3200, f2.0 and around 14-15 secs with my 35mm prime. But my Canon EOS 6D is good enough for basically anything in low light, except beyond ISO 6400. Well, people's needs are very different. Can't wait for the 6D mark II version. I expect it to have around 24 or 26 Megapixels, but I wish it would go down instead of going up

Hope for a significant improvement in high-iso-performance, no matter what's inside.


cheers

btw. I'm from Austria and my english isn't really perfect, so... excuse me

P.S.: And even 12 or 15 megapixels would be more than enough for most people imo.

I reckon your English is excellent!

I'd love amazing high ISO performance - and let's face it, progress in that area has been huge already. The 645z does amazing things from what I've seen, you should check it out!

But this new Canon is not aimed at that, and that's fair enough. A lot of people say 'I want more MP, not better high ISO', so this is probably aimed at them.

 

[Zerg2905]

Hello everyone!
I have voted 50 Mp, because I'm really curious about what results the 50 Mp sensor+ MP-E 65 combo might bring...

 

[RGF]

Biggest factor here is quality of lens. I will take all the MP my lens can handle for Landscape and macro.

For wildlife, i'd like a crop camera with 1D build, good IQ at 6400 ISO, and 10 - 12 FPS and 25 MP.

 

[Diko]

The difference is similar to 4k video downscaled to 1080 compared to native 1080p footage.
My opinion is that higher resolution can be very useful sometimes and it's good to have a camera that can offer you that when you need it.

AFAIK since 4k production/broadcasting is still quite expensive... Aside from Netflix whose "House of Cards"'s reviews are still somewhat with mixed feelings. And yet there's been some time since 4K production equipment is already available it is mostly used for cropping and reframing.

As for the Capture Resolution - never forget that it depends not only on sensor but also on lens, which makes the glass more important since the iterations there are seldom.

I am looking forward to see what the Zeiss primes can deliver on a 50MP sensor ...

The Otus lenses will deliver all 50mp,and I suspect the Sigma Art series will do pretty well.

Regarding the Otus lenses, I don't think so. The 135mm (which is not an Otus) probably will, but the 55 and 85 are slightly softer in the corners. Of course they will be better than most lenses but will probably not deliver full 50MP worth of detail. IMO the two lenses capable of extracting all the detail of a 50MP sensor are the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS USM II and the Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm f/2. We'll have to wait and see.

Where the hack did you read that? Or you have one yourself? I hardly believe it. :-(((

Hi, im new at canonrumors.com. Great stuff to read over here

Herzlich willkommen. This is a great site to spend some free time. Here you will learn a lot. People are interesting non-haters and rarely there are troll post. People never stop bringing new resources and usually show quite strong arguments no matter contra or pro regarding versatile topics.

As a foreign speaker I can assure you that your English is great. I am no example myself due to too fast writing and bad focus (usually have at least 10 tabs opened).