Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Is 24MP the new 12MP?  (Read 2881 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21969
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP? Note well the word "most"!
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2019, 09:12:16 am »

Exactly. The question (as usual) is about what fraction of photographers are highly satisfied by a certain level of performance and what fraction require more and desire it enough to bear any related extra cost, weight, etc.
I am not interested in the nonsense we so often get that boils down roughly to:
"my chosen format is ideal for legitimate photography;
larger format users are misguided or snobs or are clinging to out-dated size needs from the film era;
smaller format users are not serious enough about IQ."


The question underlying my OP could be paraphrased as
"Is 24MP all that most interchangeable lens camera users need for most purposes?"
along with followup questions like:
- what fraction is "most", both fraction of photographers and maybe also fractions of related revenues and profits?
- what fraction instead have a good use for more detail, requiring higher pixel counts?
- how will the interchangeable lens camera market respond, in terms of the split between sensors of up to about 24MP vs sensors that can record significantly more detail than that?


I think that the greatest difficulty isn't a numbers game, but a format one. As most know, using a 2x3 format means a lot of cropping when you want to do vertical shots, especially for things like headshots, where the space above or below the face is too great to retain a good visual balance. It was ever so, and one of the reasons for the huge success of the 500 Series Hasselblad in so many studios.

For horizontal heads, however, 2x3 can be perfect. We see differently, up/down or sideways. Try it.

There is no single factor but many.

Rob

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2256
    • Pieter Kers
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2019, 09:25:52 am »

10 years ago i bought a 24MP Nikon d3x. At that time the only 24MP DSLR camera.
If you had started this topic then, everybody would have said 12MP is more than enough, but I was doing architecture and 24MP was just right for me.
I even would have liked more pixels, but it was this or spending much more money on an MF.

"Is 24MP all that most interchangeable lens camera users need for most purposes?"
maybe, but that is not of interest to any photographer; It is only statistics.
It all depends on what you think you need to get the photo you want to make.
I know some very fine photographers that need only a pinhole camera, others need an MF.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6418
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #22 on: March 19, 2019, 05:39:24 pm »

10 years ago i bought a 24MP Nikon d3x. At that time the only 24MP DSLR camera.
If you had started this topic then, everybody would have said 12MP is more than enough, ...
No, not everyone would have said that, since some were already using well over 12MP (Canon was at 17MP 15 years ago and at 21MP 12 years ago), some were at over 24MP, for example with MF or scanned film, and some were aiming far higher, for the pixel counts needed to match large format film.

"Is 24MP all that most interchangeable lens camera users need for most purposes?"
maybe, but that is not of interest to any photographer; It is only statistics.
It is very much of interest to photographers choosing a camera and a system, looking at trade-offs of resolution, frame rate, dynamic range, cost, weight and such.

It all depends on what you think you need to get the photo you want to make.
Exactly; and the desired amount of resolution is one of the factors in that, as you show with your comment that "24MP was just right for me."

I know some very fine photographers that need only a pinhole camera, others need an MF.

Indeed; no one is disputing your point that _some_ significant number of photographers have a good use for MF or 47MP or 100MP or 150MP or whatever.  But how many times do I have to explain the difference between "most" and "all"? Your reply seems like several others which start from the undisputed fact that "Some of us need more than 24MP" and then object to my question as if I am denying or denigrating that need.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2019, 06:33:34 pm by BJL »
Logged

faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 970
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #23 on: March 19, 2019, 05:46:00 pm »

Some photographers need more than 24MP, some need less. Some don't need any MP because they shoot film. The whole topic is inane.

Kirk_C

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #24 on: March 20, 2019, 09:31:15 pm »

Some photographers need more than 24MP, some need less. Some don't need any MP because they shoot film. The whole topic is inane.

It really is just silly.

Should we discuss how good a tire you need on your car ? It would be the same, highly subjective and pointless discussion.

There is no correct answer. Walk away from your computer, pick up a camera you like and shoot whatever you like. Far more productive and fun.
Logged

HonorableSensor

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2019, 08:06:04 am »

I recently went to Guatemala, and, because I was worried a bit about being a target of crime, and also because the purpose was to spend time with people I knew instead of taking photos... I took my ~$150 worth, Sony DSC-R1, which is a 10MP APS-C camera with 24-120mm built-in zoom.  I wouldn't say that I really "needed" much more than that, and it forced me to be that much more careful and inventive (since it didn't have any sort of stabilization).  The 10MP files are pretty crisp, especially the ones shot at lowest ISO...
Logged

Gigi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 517
    • some work
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2019, 08:37:27 am »

There is also the "high res"hunt for precision. Comes along with yhe joy of pixel peeping and definition akin to large format film.

Like others here, one has to ask - how much is enough? Been considering a M4/3, or APS to return to faster, handheld, portable,  smaller and (dare one say) more relaxed shooting? A desire to be more inspired by events, not total refinement. Of course, there is a danger of backsliding into mere snappy shooting.

Perhaps its not just MP, or camera size, but also how one uses the tools and expects for results.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2019, 05:11:49 am by Gigi »
Logged
Geoff

Lightsmith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 189
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2019, 05:49:21 pm »

Sensor megapixels are important. It was the release of the Nikon D800/D800e at 36MP that first provided enough resolution for many fine art 4x5 sheet film users to switch to digital. When I bought the D800e I saw that its JPG files could be enlarged very nearly as much as the RAW files from the the 12MP D3 camera.

With the D850 I have a 45MP full frame camera and at an APS-C crop it functions as a 19MP camera so it is very usable in crop mode or with long telephoto lenses to truly increase image size. I see this with the 500mm PF lens that is the size and weight of a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens and 500mm on the D850 provides 94% of the image size I would get with the D5 20MP camera attached to a 800mm lens.

When entry level full frame 24MP cameras like the Nikon D600 arrived in 2012 it marked the shift to 24MP as the new base.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21969
Re: Is 24MP the new 12MP?
« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2019, 04:58:18 pm »

Sensor megapixels are important. It was the release of the Nikon D800/D800e at 36MP that first provided enough resolution for many fine art 4x5 sheet film users to switch to digital. When I bought the D800e I saw that its JPG files could be enlarged very nearly as much as the RAW files from the the 12MP D3 camera.

With the D850 I have a 45MP full frame camera and at an APS-C crop it functions as a 19MP camera so it is very usable in crop mode or with long telephoto lenses to truly increase image size. I see this with the 500mm PF lens that is the size and weight of a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens and 500mm on the D850 provides 94% of the image size I would get with the D5 20MP camera attached to a 800mm lens.

When entry level full frame 24MP cameras like the Nikon D600 arrived in 2012 it marked the shift to 24MP as the new base.


Yes, your D850 has lots of pixies, but it still loses a lot of them if you need to make your verticles less thin. As mentioned earlier, it's also a format problem, shape problem of the sensor. Far better a square format with the D850's longest side as the definition of the square's, too.

Then, when you decide to crop, you still start from a better point of departure.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up