Now there's 60mp on a larger chip for $40K. Sounds about right to me. Of course I am in not going to buy one at that price, and I don't know what the hell I would do with all that data anyway, as there is not much data that actually sticks to a printed page, now is there? I mean, how much actual data is there on a 16x20 PRINT? Anyone know? 3, 5, 10mp? 20?
There are a surprising number of applications where 60 megapixels is not enough, but will have to do because it's the best single shot solution there is.
One very specific example: I've just been accepted to a photos-only gallery on Lincoln Rd. in South Beach which displays very few prints less than 30x40 or less than $4000 and each artist has 1-5 prints. Can you make a 30x40 from a 22mp dSLR? Absolutely yes. It will even look very sharp and detailed to most people if not compared directly to a higher res image. However, when someone walks into that gallery and the huge prints all hang side-by-side the difference between something like a 1Ds II/III and a P40+/P65+ becomes very important for images where resolution is a visual component like landscapes or environmental fashion shots. It's not as important as the quality of your imagery, but it's more than a tie-breaker, and for better or for worse the sales-people often reference the incredible detail of the shots which contain it (a lot easier for them to 'sell' than how the image makes you feel).
We could argue all day about what DPI is required but for simplicity I'll pick 300dpi.
- A 16x20 at 300dpi is 28 megapixels of uncropped data
- A 20x30 at 300dpi is 54 megapixels of uncropped data
- A 30x40 at 300dpi is 108 megapixels of uncropped data
Add a crop, a rotation, correct the perspective, or correct lens distortion, or start pushing the file hard in post (dramatic effects) and the requirements can quickly jump. For instance a 15% crop on each side is a 28% drop in resolution.
Again, I'll be the first to point out that even 100 dpi can look pretty good, and that not every image benefits from razor sharp detail. But then the high end which Medium Format plays in is not usually content with "pretty good". Whether the extra cost is worth it to you is a very personal decision, so please don't project your feeling on this onto everyone else.
And of course the 65+ also has the larger sensor, a bit higher dynamic range than the 20/21/25/30/45, a digital horizon-meter, in-back ratings, composition grids, b+w viewing in the field, a built in flip down fw-cover, and Sensor+ for situations where you need higher ISO or don't want to deal with the large files but don't want to carry/learn/deal-with a second platform. So the resolution is not the only benefit.
Doug Peterson
(e-mail Me)__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter:
Read Latest or Sign Up
