Hi,
In short:
DR would generally be better with large pixels.
How many pixels are needed depends on eyesight and viewing distance.
It seems that many photographers regard 12 MP as enough for normal size prints.
Prints, themselves have very small DR, having a density range of normally .05 - 2.3 which is 7.5 stops. So DR is not relevant for print, having a good DR can be most helpful in preparing a picture for printing, however.
It seems that both noise and DR are improved with downsampling.
In real world the issue may be more complex. It seems that those having both DSLRs and MFDBs see advantages of MFDBs over DSLRs event in small prints. Although
both have more than 12 MPixels. It's less than obvious where the advantage comes from. My guess is that MFDBs need less resolution (a lower linear frequency) for a certain size of detail in print. Modern MF-lenses are pretty good, so they probably have higher MTF (edge contrast) for a given size of detail. With a DSLR the MTF for a certain size of detail would be the same regardless of the number of pixels (if compare FX to FX or APS-C to APS-C).
I would recommend this article from Ctein:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...-be-enough.htmlOr my own writing here:
http://83.177.178.7/ekr/index.php/photoart...xels-do-we-need.
In short it could be said that the eye can detect very fine detail, but is most sensitive to edge contrast on larger detail like perhaps 0.2 mm. So with different MPixels you are at different parts of the "Contrast Sensitivity Function" curve of the eye.
Finally, few of the pixels remain with sloppy technique. Use a good tripod, MLU, focus exactly and don't stop down to much, else the pixels are going to be wasted anyway.
Best regards
Erik
I have noticed that some newer high-end cameras use full frame sensors with enhanced light gathering characteristics. However, these are "only" 12 megapixel sensors. Does better light gathering ability translate into superior dynamic range? In enlargement printing, would you rather have greater dynamic range or just more pixels? Can quality really outpace quantity when it comes to preserving detail?