Too many megapixels?

[jgbowerman]

I can tell you the 24 mp of the NEX-7 is more than enough. If I got a D800E I would shoot it at 5:4 ratio which is only 30 mp. All those mp's create a real mess in PP if you stitch. I am finding my computer handles the files just fine with no upgrading.

John, I'm thinking of doing the same once the D800E delivers. I often find a 5:4 ratio more pleasing than a 3:2. I figure a 5:4 ratio will also encourage more vertical formats in composition with or without stitching. With the D700, I hardly ever cropped images, trying to squeeze the most out of a 12MP sensor. With the NEX-7, I frequently start with a 5:4 crop in Lightroom. Another advantage of going to 5:4 with a D800 is the extra latitude provided when using a T/S lens.

As for the computer, I am going to upgrade to a USB 3.0 UDMA Reader (RAW Steel). It requires installing a USB 3.0 PCIe (RocketU USB 3.0 for Mac), but it is well worth the 5Gb/s in transfer speed.

Cheers!

Greg

[Ellis Vener]

I can tell you the 24 mp of the NEX-7 is more than enough. If I got a D800E I would shoot it at 5:4 ratio which is only 30 mp. All those mp's create a real mess in PP if you stitch. I am finding my computer handles the files just fine with no upgrading.

Please tell me another one because really that is one of the funniest blanket statements I've read so far this year and I'll need another good laugh tomorrow. (Says the man who has been shooting single and multi-row (up to dozens of frames per) stitched composite panoramics with a D800 and before that with a PhaseOne P45+. And no I am not using a super computer, just an off the shelf i5 iMac stuffed with RAM running PTGui Pro.)

[Scott O.]

I have had my D800 about 3 weeks.  Have used it for landscapes (on a tripod) and the images are stunning, as expected.  But I just got done shooting 2 of my grandson's baseball games, an area the camera is not supposed to excel at.  I was shooting off a tripod using a gimbal-type head, and again the results were stunning.  The only weakness I have seen so far is lack of depth of field, caused by me shooting relatively wide open.  I am looking forward to pushing the diffraction issue and using it hand held to see what it can do.  So far the camera has exceeded my wildest hopes.  At least at this point, there is no such thing as too many pixels!

[BernardLanguillier]

I can tell you the 24 mp of the NEX-7 is more than enough. If I got a D800E I would shoot it at 5:4 ratio which is only 30 mp. All those mp's create a real mess in PP if you stitch. I am finding my computer handles the files just fine with no upgrading.

Please tell me another one because really that is one of the funniest blanket statements I've read so far this year and I'll need another good laugh tomorrow. (Says the man who has been shooting single and multi-row (up to dozens of frames per) stitched composite panoramics with a D800 and before that with a PhaseOne P45+. And no I am not using a super computer, just an off the shelf i5 iMac stuffed with RAM running PTGui Pro.)

I'll join you here. My 5 years old Mac Pro is still able to deal without issues with the 400-600 megapixel panos I have been creating with it!   The bottle neck is the speed of the attached storage, that's it.







Cheers,
Bernard

[Pingang]

if computation power and memory technology contitnue to develop, I think more is better, as long as technology and software supports it. The largest issues of very high megapixels may eventually limit the useful range of f stops and then depth of field so I thibnk the next in-camera automation on camera after HDR will be the focusing stack to blend different focus into larger depth of field at wish. Of course, the photography the way we knew it from past, know it presently may also have newer application make use of innovative features to come. Certainly there will always people rather to take photographs they way they prefer, but there will be new generations wish to take the art they way they want.

Pingang
Shanghai

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My take is that the D800 certainly does not have to many megapixels. The Canon 5DII, Sony Alpha 900 and the D3X were all a bit above 20 MP. Going to 36 MP is a minor improvement, like 20-25%. It is far less than going from say A2 to A1 print size. But, more megapixels help with Moiré, AA-filterig will be less, the images will interpoalte and sharpen better. In no case will a higher resolving sensor give a worse result than a low resolving sensor. Making best use of the high resolution may be demanding, on the other hand.

Best regards
Erik

Having read many threads extolling the virtues of the D800 (E or otherwise) I can confirm that it is exactly what they all say it is - a fine precision instrument.  Yes it requires careful and precise technique to get the benefit from all those photo sites and yes it is very unforgiving of any shortfall in that technique.

I sold my M9 to buy this camera and I am regretting it.  I have a 60MP MF system that only works well on a tripod in good light.  I now have a 35mm system that only works well on a tripod but additionally in not such good light.  What I don't have is a camera that I can hand hold and take images that utilise all the capabilities of the camera.  What I don't need is a smaller version of my MFD system.

I ordered this camera months ago without really being aware of the constraints placed on the usability of the camera by the multiplicity of megapixels. I am beginning to think that Canon might be right in concentrating on other more user friendly features?  Doesn't seem to be helping their sales though and I worry about being completely wrong in the face of an avalanche of praise for the D800.  I just wonder whether all of those users switching from D3S or D700 bodies might actually be wondering if they have done the wrong thing?   Is this heresy?  Am I wrong?  Feel free to comment.

[BernardLanguillier]

Making best use of the high resolution may be demanding, on the other hand.

No more than 25% more demanding.

I have not found this to be a problem at all. I believe that if you have the basic technique to get consistently sharp results with 20+ class cameras, then your technique is likely to be good enough for 36mp too.

Cheers,
Bernard

[JohnBrew]

The bottle neck is the speed of the attached storage, that's it.
Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard, that must be my problem - speed of storage. A situation I'll be rectifying today or tomorrow.

Ellis, no need to lord it over everyone that you are handling giant files. 24 mp is enough FOR ME since my printer only goes to 17" wide, obviously your situation is different.

[MarkL]

I don't really understand the megapixel hate, any shots with D800 will never produce worse results than a D3/D700 all being equal. It's not like if you don't shoot the best glass at f/4 locked down on a block of granite with MLU you will get worse results, even stopped down to diffraction inducing apertures there is still a big gain: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/d-resolution-tests Even in absolute worst case scenario you only get the same resolution as 12MP, blurry 36MP is still better than manufacturing blurry 12MP to 36MP. Why spend thousands on lenses and handicap them making sure you will never see the best of what they can produce?

[jgbowerman]

As for the computer, I am going to upgrade to a USB 3.0 UDMA Reader (RAW Steel). It requires installing a USB 3.0 PCIe (RocketU USB 3.0 for Mac), but it is well worth the 5Gb/s in transfer speed.

Update: Turns out the RocketU USB 3.0 pci cards are only good for "external hard drives". They can't see card readers! I returned mine and ordered a Sonnet Allegro USB 3.0. Sonnet tested five different card readers, and only one did not read with their PCI card. The RAW Steel reader I'm using was not on their list, so I'm going for it and keeping my fingers crossed.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, I agree. If you have proper technique the images will be nearly optimal.

On the other hand many D800 users come from the D700 camp, and now have three times the pixels, or 73% more linear resolution. So did they not use proper technique on the D700 it will show 73% more on the D800.

Interestingly, I went trough something similar. I got a Sony Alpha 77, with 24MP APS-C sensor. I suddenly found my 70-300/3.5-4.5G lens lacking in performance. It may have been so and so with lesser sensors.

But whatever technique is used the D800 mages will not be worse than D700 images if scaled to same size.

Best regards
Erik

No more than 25% more demanding.

I have not found this to be a problem at all. I believe that if you have the basic technique to get consistently sharp results with 20+ class cameras, then your technique is likely to be good enough for 36mp too.

Cheers,
Bernard

[torger]

But whatever technique is used the D800 mages will not be worse than D700 images if scaled to same size.

Of course true, but don't underestimate the pixel-peep angst! :-)

I know Nikon users that chose a D700 rather than D800 because they don't really like to see that the sensor makes the lens limitations much more visible. And there's also camera shake, if you have a relaxed hand-held shooting style how fun is it to see that most of those 30+ megabyte raws is kind of blurry at 100%? I think that Nikon not introducing a reduced-resolution raw format (like Canon has) with the D800 was a mistake. Not everyone shoots landscapes from a tripod or portraits with studio lighting.

[OldRoy]

Update: Turns out the RocketU USB 3.0 pci cards are only good for "external hard drives". They can't see card readers! I returned mine and ordered a Sonnet Allegro USB 3.0. Sonnet tested five different card readers, and only one did not read with their PCI card. The RAW Steel reader I'm using was not on their list, so I'm going for it and keeping my fingers crossed.

Although it doesn't seem to have been widely discussed there are numerous compatibility problems associated with USB 3 implementation.

In my own experience with the one computer I use regularly that has a USB 3 equipped motherboard (using Win 7/64) I've noticed that powering up an external drive after the computer is already running usually results in a problem. The drive isn't recognised and if I use Disk Management to rescan the drives the USB external drive, once recognised, reports as requiring formatting. The first time I saw this I was somewhat alarmed. Booting the same PC when the drive is already powered up results in it being recognised correctly.

I believe that this sort of thing is quite common. I have no such problems with eSata.
Roy

[BernardLanguillier]

Of course true, but don't underestimate the pixel-peep angst! :-)

I know Nikon users that chose a D700 rather than D800 because they don't really like to see that the sensor makes the lens limitations much more visible. And there's also camera shake, if you have a relaxed hand-held shooting style how fun is it to see that most of those 30+ megabyte raws is kind of blurry at 100%? I think that Nikon not introducing a reduced-resolution raw format (like Canon has) with the D800 was a mistake. Not everyone shoots landscapes from a tripod or portraits with studio lighting.

The only thing that needs to be done to tap into the potential of the D800 hand held is to set up correctly its fantastic auto-iso capability.

That function alone should justify the price of the upgrade because of how much it increases the amount of sharp images. For hand held shooters working with zoom lenses, changing lens frequently or working with several bodies equipped with different lenses (wedding, events,...), this may be the most important feature of the camera.

Cheers,
Bernard

[David Watson]

The only thing that needs to be done to tap into the potential of the D800 hand held is to set up correctly its fantastic auto-iso capability.

That function alone should justify the price of the upgrade because of how much it increases the amount of sharp images. For hand held shooters working with zoom lenses, changing lens frequently or working with several bodies equipped with different lenses (wedding, events,...), this may be the most important feature of the camera.

Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard

I totally agree. I shot my first wedding with the D800E last Saturday.  All hand held, no flash using auto iso set at max 1600 min shutter speed 1/250 and one lens inside and out (85mm 1.4).  No problems and a very high hit rate.  Thanks for your advice.

david