- Status
well_dunno said:
But there's some entertainment to be found in biased arguments and name calling
... no, really, I think it's a pity that there's no Canon Rumors Wiki because there are often good arguments on both sides, but because of the thread structure they get lost and people comment only on some sentences they randomly pick. Not to mention arguments are repeated all over again, "what's the best uwa on aps-c anyone"?Looking at the mp war, it's really no matter of clueless vs. "clueful", but just who might improve their work (i.e. not exactly *need*) more mp in which situations and what drawbacks/tradeoffs it produces.
Attachments
Upvote
0
I wouldn't touch a Canon 30MP camera if made this year...they either need to improve their low ISO abilities or partner with Sony to defeat the low ISO banding.
Hate to sound so pessimistic, but if the 5d3 really has little improvements over the 5d2 at less than ISO 400, imagine what the banding on 30MP would look like? This is probably why they barely increased the resolution on the 5d3 and DECREASED it on the 1DX. That's my thoughts, anyway.
Hate to sound so pessimistic, but if the 5d3 really has little improvements over the 5d2 at less than ISO 400, imagine what the banding on 30MP would look like? This is probably why they barely increased the resolution on the 5d3 and DECREASED it on the 1DX. That's my thoughts, anyway.
Upvote
0
birdman said:
No, I think it is a general reduction of resolution the very top models. Nikon D4 anyone? D3x was 24.6 D4 16.
Upvote
0
T
takoman46
Guest
birdman said:
Actually, regarding the 1Dx, I think it's the other way around. Canon increased megapixels from the 1D Mark IV and maintained the image quality performance of the 1Ds Mark III. Just think that the 1Ds Mark III never had the continuous shooting speed and ISO performance of the 1D Mark IV so by combining both previous generation models into a single body and still managing to make further advancements in performance is a great thing in itself. It's easy to look at the negatives and criticize. At first it was hard for me to see the advancement as well knowing that the 1Ds Mark III was higher resolution than the new 1Dx.
Upvote
0
Z
ZEROrhythm
Guest
briansquibb said:ZEROrhythm said:
If you had read my response then you would have spotted TWO options
1. A MF body that gives you the high mp you asked for
2. Create a virtual high MP body by stitching several images together.
And you call us clueless
I have nothing against briansquibb. I bet you are a great photographer and know your ways around your equipments and gears, but when you go into a thread and start posting why High Mega Pixel is unimportant, when the person only ask when is the next High MP camera coming out, makes you clueless. you should be posting your information in the d800 vs 5d mk 3 thread.
When you start giving advice to other people about what they need to do with out knowing what they do, what type of programs they use, what are their pipeline structure, and most importantly, what they do with their photos, makes you really clueless.
I do not tell you what type of camera you need to use, what type of gears you need to carry around, how you should take photos, and what you should do with your photos. So what gives you the rights to tell me why I don't need a High Mega Pixel camera or any one else? Do you work in my field? Do you use the same software as I do? Do know my work flow? Do you even know why I need a High Mega Pixel camera?
I will always need more Mega Pixel has I will always need more Polygons it's part of my work and part of my art. I'm a detail freak. I work in the pixel level in Photoshop as I do in the polygon level with my 3d. I value every pixel and polygon I am given because I've worked on video games, I know consoles have hardware limitation, but I have to get the most out of it. I also work with million and billions of polygons sometimes. I will always want more to push myself and my art farther and father. That is why I started doing photography to build my library of stock photos so i can use them anytime, for my needs. The more details I'm given the better, down to every strand of hair, every cloth fiber, every blade of grass, every thing. I use them for texture maps, alpha maps. displacement maps, and so forth. I stitch, modify, paint over, and create my own images too from my photos. Given more Pixel means I have a lot more real estate from every photo i take, which means I can take more out of the photos. I sample many tiny things sometimes, hair, buttons, scars, what ever catches my eyes.
Please if you can't understand why a person needs so many mega pixel try to understand where they are coming from and understand why they would need it.
Here's is some of my personal stuff and a photo i took of my wife on my 5d2.
Attachments
Upvote
0
B
briansquibb
Guest
ZEROrhythm said:
1. I have never said that high MP is unimportant
2. I suggested ways round the non high mp dslr bodies
3. I have not posted anything in this thread about the d800 vs 5DIII
ZEROrhythm said:
I did not tell you how to do your work - just how to get the high megapixels you obviously are after. The advice I gave you did not relate to your workflow or what you do with your photos.
And your response is yet again to call me clueless.
ZEROrhythm said:
I didn't tell you what camera you need to use - just passed on the fact that MF are the highest mp at the moment. Seems more than reasonable to me in response to your question
You didn't stipulate any further limitations such as budget, environment etc so my response answered your question
ZEROrhythm said:
When advice is offered you have the choice whether to take it or not. Being rude and libellous is not an appropriate way to respond
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
