Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Resolutio versus Image Quality  (Read 6283 times)

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10639
    • Echophoto
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2017, 11:23:42 AM »

Hi,

One important factor is full well capacity and we can deduce it from Signal Noise Ratio.

Sony A7rII and Nikon D810 have an SNR of 46.3 and 46.4 at base ISO, while the S (typ 006) has 42.4. So the Leica cannot make use of it's sensor size. The Nikon D810 and the Sony A7rII also have lower base ISO and that indicates that they absorb more light.

The only advantage the S2 or S (type 006) may hold is really MTF, due to larger pixels. But to reach that advantage the S/S2 would need very accurate focus and there is significant doubt if it can achieve it. Manual focus is not quite accurate enough and AF is problematic, too. Sony A7rII and Nikon D810 can use magnified live view for pin point accurate focus, CCD based sensors don't have that capability.

The CMOS sensor in the S (Type 007) is probably a better match. But, best of breed 24x36 mm technology is quiet a bit of very stiff competition for slightly larger formats.

100 MP at 54x40 mm combined with Sony Exmoor technology, that is a different race…

Best regards
Erik




I thought to an extent this still goes back to the old adage "no replacement for displacement" or in the camera world...sensor size.  Imagine drawing an image on a postage stamp and an 8x10 canvas.  Which one will have the ability to show more variations of tone, subtle detail, and finer variation?  Obviously the larger working space.  It's just straight forward. 

Does the Leica S2 show more...yes probably, it has a somewhat larger sensor surface area.  (30% is it?)

The difference now a days is that tech has gotten really good.  Lenses have gotten really good.  Resolution shrinks the gap between the extremes. 


If you have ever seen an original 11x14 contact print that was masterfully made it is breathtaking.  Nothing we have compares in my opinion.  Though technically it may not be as clinical, the subtlety is amazing.  Talk about surface area! 

Image quality is subjective.  And everything now a days can create excellent prints and visual content.  There is still a difference is fine variation and tonal gradation between sensor sizes.  I use m43 and a 49mm my sensor daily together.  The gap is not huge, but there's is a difference.  There is a difference between this and my 36mm sensors going either way.  But the gap has gotten inconsequential for most images for most general uses.  In my opinion. 

I notice the subtle tone differences mostly in skin and twighlight images..at least in the work that I do.  There is more complexity and "truth to the scene" in the larger sensors.  However, that doesn't necessarily make it any better.

David Eichler

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 576
    • San Francisco Architectural and Interior Photographer
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2017, 09:00:25 PM »

To add to what I said above, when I used Leica equipment many years before digital, there were some Leitz lenses that had a look that I liked above all other small format lenses I used. However, this did not apply to all Leitz lenses. Some were mediocre lenses, yet you still paid a high price for them. I don't know if that quality that I saw with film has carried over to digital. If it does, a good copy of a 50mm Summicron on a full-frame Leica would probably still be one of the best  representatives of the Leitz look.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10639
    • Echophoto
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #22 on: February 20, 2017, 01:23:05 PM »

Hi,

Diglloyd have done some comparisons like that. The one I have studied was a comparison between the Leica S2 and the Nikon D3X. In that case the Leica S2 had significant aliasing while the Nikon had little. The Nikon images were significantly sharper at the corners. The comparison was probably between the Zeiss 100/2.0 Macro Planar and the correspondng S-lens.

I don't any longer subscribe to Diglloyd, so I cannot really post a reference to that article.

Focusing is critical to achieving optimal results, and Lloyd Chambers mentioned that was very hard on the S2. Modern cameras offer live view and magnified live view is probably the most accurate way focus. On the other hand, he had a lot (an awful lot) of aliasing on the S2 in that test image, so he must have gotten focus right.

Best regards
Erik


I would actually really like to see a proper comparison like this. Personally these two systems are two i am considering carefully.

The S with S lenses really does have a very high quality look that I think might be tricky to top and from what I have seen from various samples I think it might have the edge. It's the smoothness of tone and colour that I have not seen in 135 cameras.

Then there is also talk of a new S at 60MP which I think will be very interesting.

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2620
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #23 on: February 22, 2017, 08:34:01 AM »

There's no substitute for skill. Resolution is secondary. Of course, sometimes both skill and resolution are interdependent.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2017, 08:37:34 AM by BobDavid »
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1889
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #24 on: February 22, 2017, 03:19:57 PM »

There's no substitute for skill. Resolution is secondary. Of course, sometimes both skill and resolution are interdependent.

There's also no substitute for resolution.

Skill lets you take a nice photo. Resolution determines how big you can print it. They can't substitute for each other.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10639
    • Echophoto
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2017, 04:27:56 PM »

Hi,

I won't argue on that, but those are floating limits.

This year I go back to Iceland. Been there in 2006, but now we have much better gear. So I go there to get some images that are technically better. But, I hope that I also learned some in the eleven years since. So I hope that I will get back with a set of great images that I may have missed back in 2006.

Best regards
Erik

There's also no substitute for resolution.

Skill lets you take a nice photo. Resolution determines how big you can print it. They can't substitute for each other.

John Nollendorfs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2017, 04:31:02 PM »

Erik:
Hope you bring the sunshine filter! ;-)
Logged

TonyVentourisPhotography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 270
    • Unlocking Olympus
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #27 on: February 22, 2017, 10:10:23 PM »

A skilled master printer can allow you to print much bigger than you think even without 50 - 100mp resolution.  I've seen plenty of amazing prints that were large back when medium format was pushing the frontiers with 16 and 22 megapixels.  We could only dream of that for big printing...wasn't so long ago...

I personally would take skill over resolution any day. 


There's also no substitute for resolution.

Skill lets you take a nice photo. Resolution determines how big you can print it. They can't substitute for each other.
Logged
Tony
Unlockingolympus.com (ebooks & blog on getting the most from your OMD & Pen)
tonyventourisphotography.com (Commercial Photography)

hogloff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #28 on: February 22, 2017, 10:23:32 PM »

A skilled master printer can allow you to print much bigger than you think even without 50 - 100mp resolution.  I've seen plenty of amazing prints that were large back when medium format was pushing the frontiers with 16 and 22 megapixels.  We could only dream of that for big printing...wasn't so long ago...

I personally would take skill over resolution any day.

Why do you feel skill and resolution are mutually exclusive? I'd take both thank you.
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1889
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2017, 01:25:04 AM »

A skilled master printer can allow you to print much bigger than you think even without 50 - 100mp resolution.  I've seen plenty of amazing prints that were large back when medium format was pushing the frontiers with 16 and 22 megapixels.  We could only dream of that for big printing...wasn't so long ago...

I personally would take skill over resolution any day.

You can print as large as you like. You just won't get any more detail out of it.

If you like to walk up to a 3m-wide print and see a blur, go for it. I prefer to see detail even when up close.
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1526
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #30 on: February 23, 2017, 03:39:34 AM »

You can print as large as you like. You just won't get any more detail out of it.

If you like to walk up to a 3m-wide print and see a blur, go for it. I prefer to see detail even when up close.

I have some photos that need to be 4 meter wide to be pleasant to look at. They have so much detail that it simply does not work smaller.
So everything works together. In this case it is a stitched 36MP image. ( posted on LL here: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=115958.20 )

I like my d810 nikon - with 36MP i can do everything in every circumstance. Affordable, good quality sensor, good lenses available at moderate price levels. etc...
It is now all up to me.
Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu

Bo_Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 108
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #31 on: February 23, 2017, 05:38:11 AM »

Why do you feel skill and resolution are mutually exclusive? I'd take both thank you.

exactly! that argument is one of the weakest and most annoying in photography.
Logged

Bo_Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 108
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #32 on: February 23, 2017, 05:39:58 AM »

You can print as large as you like. You just won't get any more detail out of it.

If you like to walk up to a 3m-wide print and see a blur, go for it. I prefer to see detail even when up close.

This too, exactly! Put a 3meter 100MP print next to a 3meter 24MP print and the difference is night and day.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10639
    • Echophoto
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #33 on: February 23, 2017, 11:20:45 AM »

Hi,

I have a 4m wide print made with a 24 MP camera just outside my office, there is no blur at all, but it is only 90 cm high and it is stitched from around 9 images.

Best regards
Erik

This too, exactly! Put a 3meter 100MP print next to a 3meter 24MP print and the difference is night and day.

prairiewing

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
    • Pat Gerlach, Photographer
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #34 on: February 23, 2017, 01:02:01 PM »

This too, exactly! Put a 3meter 100MP print next to a 3meter 24MP print and the difference is night and day.

Probably, but the numbers don't tell us which is going to be the better photograph so round and round we go.
Logged
Pat Gerlach



Pat Gerlach, Photographer
www.patgerlach.com

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10639
    • Echophoto
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #35 on: February 23, 2017, 04:54:14 PM »

Hi,

Two small real world experiences.

A couple of years ago one of my colleagues decorated a shopping mall with pictures from the town where I live. Those prints are about three meter high and fill something like 30 m of wall space. It is quite a few pictures, but it is also like 40m of wall space. All that was shot on Nikon D90. Yes, the images are quite fuzzy, but nobody cares.

This year we rebuilt the cafeteria where I work and I was asked to provide some decorations. One of my suggestions was accepted:


That image got much admiration for it's technical quality and I have been asked for two additional prints. Furthermore, I was asked for prints to decorate a lot of wall space in our offices. I suggested something like 90 images of which 11 were chosen:

https://echophoto.smugmug.com/KSU/Choosen/

The alternates were here:
https://echophoto.smugmug.com/KSU/Korridor/

https://echophoto.smugmug.com/KSU/Spice/

We had a panel choosing the images. Technical aspects were not discussed at all. All selection was based on web size images and technique was not discussed at all. It was simply presumed that technical quality was OK.

There was one image were technique was discussed, this one:

With this image we felt that it may be to dark and low contrast. The final image is one of the better ones.

Best regards
Erik





Probably, but the numbers don't tell us which is going to be the better photograph so round and round we go.

prairiewing

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
    • Pat Gerlach, Photographer
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #36 on: February 23, 2017, 05:09:23 PM »

I wasn't trying to be contentious Erik.  If the images were identical except for one being from 24mp the other 100,  the 100 would look better but why and when would that ever happen?  I always desire more resolution, my main two bodies are 50 and 42mp.  Ive enjoyed this discussion and I always enjoy your knowledgeable and gentlemanly contributions.
Logged
Pat Gerlach



Pat Gerlach, Photographer
www.patgerlach.com

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1889
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #37 on: February 23, 2017, 05:16:28 PM »

Probably, but the numbers don't tell us which is going to be the better photograph so round and round we go.

Two completely different and unrelated things.

Technical skill is a given - it's a basic prerequisite. If you lack the skill to take a shot or do the post-processing, you're not even in the game.

But, if you have the technical skill to take a photo, it's your equipment that determines what you can do with it. If you know what you're doing, the same shot can be taken with an iPhone or a 100MP MFDB. You can do a lot more with the MFDB file than with the iPhone JPEG. Skill has little to do with it.

And the skill requirement for landscape photography isn't high. Most of it is down to planning (using Google Earth, TPE and astronomy and weather charts), physical stamina and luck (weather, etc.). If you can meet this basic skill requirement, the only difference between your photo and a photo taken by someone standing next to you is the gear.

Logged

hogloff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #38 on: February 23, 2017, 07:16:15 PM »

Probably, but the numbers don't tell us which is going to be the better photograph so round and round we go.

Obviously not...but given the same photo...I'd take the one with the high pixel count than the one with the low pixel count. How about you? You'd rather have the mushy large print on the wall or the crisp large print?
Logged

hogloff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: Resolutio versus Image Quality
« Reply #39 on: February 23, 2017, 07:23:35 PM »



And the skill requirement for landscape photography isn't high. Most of it is down to planning (using Google Earth, TPE and astronomy and weather charts), physical stamina and luck (weather, etc.). If you can meet this basic skill requirement, the only difference between your photo and a photo taken by someone standing next to you is the gear.

I totally disagree with this. That's like saying for glamour shots in fashion magazines...its all the makeup people and the model and the gear...the pinhead that presses the shutter has nothing to do with it. It's like saying the camera with the amazing focus tracking and 12 fps is what captures the great sport photos...the photographer is there to just hold the camera.

Getting the right exposure and composition for an awe inspiring landscape image takes skill and know how...not just luck as you imply.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up