Okavango Delta Camera Choice

[Morris Taub]

Hi Michael, I understand your decision making process for the equipment you took with you, but I wonder, I mean I'm sure before leaving you considered final print size and quality with this choice as well.

I'm curious about how big these D3 files can be enlarged, (they're cropped somewhat already) and still maintain the final print quality that would satisfy you.

Like for your gallery prints, I'd assume the 1DsMarklll images would have given better enlargements, though you might have missed some great images in practice. Or is this, having to print smaller, not an issue for you?

I keep reading about the advantages of the 21 megapixel cams for larger print work.

I ask because I'm thinking about a D700 for myself and would like to be able to supply images big enough for a double spread magazine page if necessary. These have to be 300dpi for print quality, (maybe I'd be able to use 240dpi on a printer for gallery prints, but I don't think that would work for four color print work). Would like to know what you feel the limitations are. I want to present the best image quality I can with this 12mp camera. My use however isn't specific, like your choice for wildlife. I'd be using the camera for a variety of subject matter...

Thanks...and welcome home...

M

[Czornyj]

maybe I'd be able to use 240dpi on a printer for gallery prints, but I don't think that would work for four color print work

Usual resolution of halftone screening in four color printing is 150-175lpi, so considering, that the screening rosette structure angle is 45°, the adequate resolution for 4 color offset is 150 x sqrt(2) or 175 x sqrt(2) (212 - 247dpi). 200lpi and error diffusion screening is not very common.

So in most cases 12MP file should be good enough for a double page spread.

[michael]

I've started printing roughly 20X24" prints for my show.

They are admittedly not up to those from a 21MP camera when it comes to absolute detail. But, even after cropping, and ressing up from about 100-120 ppi files to 240 ppi for printing, results are fine.

Do I wish that I'd shot with a 21MP for large prints? Yes.

But am I happy I used what I did, because it meant getting shots I otherwise might not have.

Michael

[BruceHouston]

I've started printing roughly 20X24" prints for my show.

They are admittedly not up to those from a 21MP camera when it comes to absolute detail. But, even after cropping, and ressing up from about 100-120 ppi files to 240 ppi for printing, results are fine.

Do I wish that I'd shot with a 21MP for large prints? Yes.

But am I happy I used what I did, because it meant getting shots I otherwise might not have.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224351\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, beginning next month as the 5D Mark II starts shipping, you may be able to have your cake and eat it too.  

Bruce

[Gary Brown]

I ask because I'm thinking about a D700 for myself and would like to be able to supply images big enough for a double spread magazine page if necessary.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dunno if this qualifies as an example, but note that the December 2003 National Geographic cover story includes a foldout, four-page-wide (double-double spread?) photo, about 24.5 inches across, made with a D1X (about 6MP).

There's a feature about the shoot at [a href=\"http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6450-6561]http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_pag...cid=7-6450-6561[/url]

[Morris Taub]

I've started printing roughly 20X24" prints for my show.

They are admittedly not up to those from a 21MP camera when it comes to absolute detail. But, even after cropping, and ressing up from about 100-120 ppi files to 240 ppi for printing, results are fine.

Do I wish that I'd shot with a 21MP for large prints? Yes.

But am I happy I used what I did, because it meant getting shots I otherwise might not have.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224351\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's pretty impressive...cropped images, 20x24 printed and you're content with the results...

I'm feeling more and more that the specs on the D700 will fill my needs for now and then some...well, unless I sign up for a photo safari...not likely...

Thanks for all the info...and Gary, thanks for that link to NG...

M

[NikosR]

Well, beginning next month as the 5D Mark II starts shipping, you may be able to have your cake and eat it too.   

Bruce
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224356\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why are saying this? Do you think that the 5DII could have substituted for the D3 in Michael's Africa shooting?

[NikosR]

That's pretty impressive...cropped images, 20x24 printed and you're content with the results...

I'm feeling more and more that the specs on the D700 will fill my needs for now and then some...well, unless I sign up for a photo safari...not likely...

Thanks for all the info...and Gary, thanks for that link to NG...

M
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The D700 (instead of the D3) would do just fine in a photo safari IMO.

[dchew]

Why are saying this? Do you think that the 5DII could have substituted for the D3 in Michael's Africa shooting?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224564\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I would question this as well, since if I remember right one of Michael's reasons for selecting the D3 was frame rate which the 5D is relatively poor at.

Dave Chew

[BruceHouston]

Why are saying this? Do you think that the 5DII could have substituted for the D3 in Michael's Africa shooting?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=224564\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I meant the resolution combined with low-light performance.  Those were two variables that Michael mentioned as important in the report.  I agree that the 5DII frame rate might not be up to snuff, though...

Bruce