The pixel war
Posted 28/08/2011 - 15:37
Link
i-Berg wrote:
Pixel density is also a good way to better understand the limitations of compact camera sensors, and they were reached some time ago. APSC-sized sensors will soon come up against the same limitations, if that is seen in terms of comparable pixel densities.
It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
Pixel density is also a good way to better understand the limitations of compact camera sensors, and they were reached some time ago. APSC-sized sensors will soon come up against the same limitations, if that is seen in terms of comparable pixel densities.
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Posted 29/08/2011 - 00:23
Link
Anvh wrote:
Sure, but would you want to?i-Berg wrote:
Pixel density is also a good way to better understand the limitations of compact camera sensors, and they were reached some time ago. APSC-sized sensors will soon come up against the same limitations, if that is seen in terms of comparable pixel densities.
It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.Pixel density is also a good way to better understand the limitations of compact camera sensors, and they were reached some time ago. APSC-sized sensors will soon come up against the same limitations, if that is seen in terms of comparable pixel densities.
I would guestimate that only a small percentage of photographers ever blow their pics up above A3. those that take pics for huge prints, posters and billboards will surely be using a medium format job.
I'd much rather the number of pixels didn't keep increasing and developments concentrated on better dynamic range and better high ISO sensitivities.
I realise that bigger numbers look attractive to many customers though
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 29/08/2011 - 07:18
Link
I think some are to focused on size.
10mp and even 6mp is enough for most but even with 20mp sensor the total light gathering capability stays the same, yes the pixels on their own will be less "quality" but in their totality there shouldn't be much difference.
10mp and even 6mp is enough for most but even with 20mp sensor the total light gathering capability stays the same, yes the pixels on their own will be less "quality" but in their totality there shouldn't be much difference.
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Posted 01/09/2011 - 08:01
Link
Anvh wrote:
It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
Is that really true? Even with current sensor resolutions, diffraction from the aperture ring is starting to limit the sharpness. A back-of-envelope calculation with these formulae suggests that a 16MP APS-C sensor (to pick one at random ) will start showing effects around f/5.6.It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
Of course, larger sensors might drive up the value of that 50mm f/1.2 even more...
Cheers,
Paul
Posted 01/09/2011 - 11:07
Link
My first digital camera was the Canon G2 which was 4MP. I used to print A4 sized images perfectly happily and was amazed at how clear and sharp they were. I loved that camera and was very upset when someone nicked it. I have never been as happy with any of the compact cameras I have bought to replace it despite the increased number of pixels. So much so that I sometimes consider buying another one from ebay. The sad thing is that it cost me something like £450 when I bought it originally, and now sells on ebay for £30...
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
Posted 01/09/2011 - 11:37
Link
I had a similar experience. I had a Fujifilm Finepix F10 with 6MP- it produced really good results. I now have a lumix with 14MP and it doesn't quite hit the mark like the Fuji did but unfortunately it bit the dust after 6 years of good service.
I can't imagine ever needing more MP than the K5 offers. Like others it will be improvements in DR and ISO that may convince me to upgrade and of course better AF.
I can't imagine ever needing more MP than the K5 offers. Like others it will be improvements in DR and ISO that may convince me to upgrade and of course better AF.
Posted 01/09/2011 - 11:53
Link
SkyRider wrote:
There's a nice debunking of the supposedly debilitating effects of difraction here.
Anvh wrote:
It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
Is that really true? Even with current sensor resolutions, diffraction from the aperture ring is starting to limit the sharpness. A back-of-envelope calculation with these formulae suggests that a 16MP APS-C sensor (to pick one at random ) will start showing effects around f/5.6.It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Posted 01/09/2011 - 12:04
Link
The author of the link makes a perfectly valid point.
Best regards, John
Posted 01/09/2011 - 15:29
Link
The 'print size' argument doesn't work for me. The bigger the picture, the further you stand from it so you tend to 'see' the same resolution regardless of how big the print is.
Posted 01/09/2011 - 16:15
Link
The limit for the eye is about 4 lp/mm so that defines what detail needs to be on a print at a given distance.
Best regards, John
Posted 01/09/2011 - 16:41
Link
I've often shut the lens down all the way for maximum DoF. The biggest problem has always been lack of light and long shutter speeds rather than diffraction. The likelihood of a wild flower moving slightly during a multi-second exposure is rather high...
K.
K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
Posted 01/09/2011 - 18:00
Link
SkyRider wrote:
Indeed but what if you've a lens that's super sharp at f/2.8?Anvh wrote:
It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
Is that really true? Even with current sensor resolutions, diffraction from the aperture ring is starting to limit the sharpness. A back-of-envelope calculation with these formulae suggests that a 16MP APS-C sensor (to pick one at random ) will start showing effects around f/5.6.It depends on the lens and the aperture but with really really really good lenses we could go up to 40MP or even 50MP with APS-C.
That's what i mean with a really really really good lens.
Here is the theory behind it.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml
With f/5.6 anything below 27mp APS-C doesn't have much lost with diffraction and if we look at f/2.8 we are talking about 107mp for APS-C so there is still something to gain with more pixels.
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
1455 posts
18 years
So all round what would you say would be the ideal number of pixels to produce the best quality photos in a digital slr. A freind of mine who does weddings and studio portraits once told me if his fuji S5 pro was a little more advanced he would not purchase another camera I think I am correct in saying the same sensor was used in the Nikon D 200.
Ian
Ian