The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Who needs more than 6 MP?

pegelli

Well-known member
At least for posting photo's on the web :lecture: :LOL:

I dusted off my KonicaMinolta 5D (from 2006), which I retired (but didn't selll) when I got my Sony A850 in 2010 and only was sporadically used since then by my kids and a few shots by me. But it still works flawlessly, the viewfinder is a bit small and dim and the AF "pedestrian", but the 6MP images off the CCD have a special feel to them, especially when combined with old Minolta lenses.

So last friday I charged the batteries, set the correct date/time and just had some fun with it.

1: Birch



2: Sheep farm



3: Visitor (slightly cropped)



4: Umbelliferous



5: Rhodondendron



6: Decaying UK letterbox lost in the Belgian countryside :facesmack:



7: Through the fields, into the wood



8: Closed


1-4 with Minolta 35/2, 5-8 with Minolta 85/1.4 RS
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
My Olympus E-1, new in 2003, also remains a perfectly viable and super high quality camera despite that its only 5 Mpixel and writes to the card at a speed that makes Methusala wince. Its Olympus Zuiko Digital lenses are excellent too.

It is nice to have more pixels for the freedom in cropping and such that they afford. But for web-only photos... eh. :D

G
 

pegelli

Well-known member
It is nice to have more pixels for the freedom in cropping and such that they afford. But for web-only photos... eh. :D
# 3 was cropped to about 3.2 MP, still plenty of MP's for web viewing :)

But for printing (the full sensor size) probably A4 or slightly larger will be the limit. But how many people (in general, not GetDPI members) really print many images larger than that?
 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
# 3 was cropped to about 3.2 MP, still plenty of MP's for web viewing :)

But for printing (the full sensor size) probably A4 or slightly larger will be the limit. But how many people (in general, not GetDPI members) really print many images larger than that?
I remember that, back in 2000, when Nikon launched the Coolpix 990 with 3MP, the claim was that it was enough for printing A4 with sufficient detail. In Oslo, camera shops even had images printed at that size on display next to the camera. With current technology (better lenses, no AA-filter etc.), that would be even more true.

If it is, 6MP should be enough for A3 and 12MP enough for A2. Any print size larger than A2 is so large that viewing distance will increase, mostly compensating for any lack of resolution. A3 printers are already expensive in the view of most consumers, and A2 is out of the question for anybody but professionals. Too big, too expensive, A2 photo paper often difficult to find etc.

24MP mostly leaves more than enough room for cropping too, and there are probably good reasons why resolution for most cameras have stopped around that area. I am still using two of my 12MP cameras (D300 and D2Xs), and resolution is not something that I worry about when using them. 10-12MP is also perfect for 4K video, and although 6-8K is on its way in, who on earth needs that kind of video resolution for anything but movie theatres? "My eyes hurt!" as a friend of mine said after visiting a shop with the latest, greatest hi-res TVs.

Hi-res cameras fall in the same category as ultra wide angle, long telephoto and extreme macro. They enable us to see stuff that we cannot see with the naked eye. It's useful for a small group of professionals and enthusiasts, fascinating for most others, but has little value with day-to-day photography for amateurs. I have a photo taken 6 years ago with the 16MP GH2 that is still touring the world as an exhibition booth background at the size of 300 x 240 cm. Visitors still say "WOW... I can almost walk into the photo!".

Two cameras that fascinate me are the video-centric Sony A7s and Panasonic GH5s with their 10-12MP sensor. I wish they had a couple more photographic features (like IBIS), but I've wondered how life would be using those two cameras only for all my photographic, and of course video, needs. My gut feeling is that it would be a liberating as well as rewarding experience. Back to basics, look for the photo, not the pixels. A7s bodies are very cheap used...

Next week, I'm picking up a package consisting of the Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 and the original E-M5. The camera has never been used, and I considered using it as a third body and backup. When I mentioned this to a photo enthusiast friend of mine last night, a man who has used two E-M5 bodies since they were launched, he immediately asked if I could sell the body to him, since both of his bodies are broken after years of use and abuse. Megapixels? I don't think he even knows how many there are in those camera. Why should he? He takes good photos with them.

So I probably won't get a shiny, new, black E-M5 after all :scry:
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Olympus E-1 with Zuiko 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 @ 20mm and f/3.9, jpeg out of camera




Olympus E-1 with Zuiko 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 @ 14mm and f/3.5, jpeg out of camera

 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
E-1 with Zuiko 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 @ 45mm and f/5.6

The 14-45mm wasn't very sharp at 45mm, particularly not wide open.



And so on...
 

Shashin

Well-known member
At least for posting photo's on the web :lecture: :LOL:

I dusted off my KonicaMinolta 5D (from 2006), which I retired (but didn't selll)
Well, that is a blast from the past. I took the 5D out with the Minolta 600mm telephoto (that was before the camera was released). I was stunned by the quality of the image and detail. It was a really nice camera. We are so use to MP in the 20+ range, we cannot understand how much information is in 6MP. I am so happy you are using that camera and never sold it.

(You may be wondering why I could get the camera before it was released--I wrote and designed the manual for that camera (I am even featured in it, at least my arm and hammer are in the flash section). At least the English manual. All languages except for Japanese were translated from the English version. I was with Minolta and then Konica Minolta from 2000 until their last day of business on March 31st, 2006.)
 

pegelli

Well-known member
Well, that is a blast from the past. I took the 5D out with the Minolta 600mm telephoto (that was before the camera was released). I was stunned by the quality of the image and detail. It was a really nice camera. We are so use to MP in the 20+ range, we cannot understand how much information is in 6MP. I am so happy you are using that camera and never sold it.

(You may be wondering why I could get the camera before it was released--I wrote and designed the manual for that camera (I am even featured in it, at least my arm and hammer are in the flash section). At least the English manual. All languages except for Japanese were translated from the English version. I was with Minolta and then Konica Minolta from 2000 until their last day of business on March 31st, 2006.)
That is a great story Sashin, I'm also glad I never sold the camera. My father had a 7D which I have now given to a friend in Poland who still uses it. Also a wonderful camera and still going strong. I bought the 5D late January 2006, just before KonicaMinolta sold their photography business to Sony. Somehow this never worried me and also allowed me to relatively cheaply pick up many wonderful 2nd hand A-mount lenses that were flooding the market the first year after the sale to Sony. Some I still use until today.

Just found your arm and hamer demonstrating the "Rear flash sync" in the manual. How many lightbulbs did you smash in the process? :ROTFL:
Or were the demos done without the bulb and then later photoshopped in the image?
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Now if you ask me whether my 50/100MP images are better? Yes they are. Are they better artistically? Probably not.

Mega pixels are great but vision is way way way more important.

I'll take a wonderful 2mp image over a boring cliche perfect 100mp image EVERY DAY!!! (I actually hate technically perfect images of cliche locations and argue with my photographer friends who think that this is the ultimate achievement - I'll take flawed images of something interesting and new every time)
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Now don't misunderstand me. I'm fortunate enough to be able to shoot:

Phase One IQ3100 with XF kit and Actus DB outfit
Fuji GFX 50s outfit
Leica M10 kit
Leica M246 kit
Sony RX100 VI
Nikon Df kit with wonderful AIS glass
Ricoh GRDII
Sigma Merrills full kit - yup all of them.

(oh, and a bunch of film Leicas)

And the overwhelming thing as I get older is that technology and art are not related. I could shoot a wonderful image with any of those cameras and the technical capabilities wouldn't matter a jot. (Ok, the Leica lenses do have a special look but I digress)

I suspect that it's similar to asking a great writer what typewriter they used. :facesmack:
 
Last edited:

pegelli

Well-known member
And the overwhelming thing as I get older is that technology and art are not related. I could shoot a wonderful image with any of those cameras and the technical capabilities wouldn't matter a jot. (Ok, the Leica lenses do have a special look but I digress)

I suspect that it's similar to asking a great writer what typewriter they used. :facesmack:
Agree, using newer/better/more advanced/bigger equipment is just fun, but usually not essential for a great photo.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I suspect that it's similar to asking a great writer what typewriter they used. :facesmack:
Actually, painters are very peculiar about their brushes, material as well as maker. I suppose they have the same relationship to that as photographers have to lenses. They needn't be the latest model or the most famous brand, but one that fits each individual's way of expression.
 

pegelli

Well-known member
I remember that, back in 2000, when Nikon launched the Coolpix 990 with 3MP, the claim was that it was enough for printing A4 with sufficient detail. In Oslo, camera shops even had images printed at that size on display next to the camera. With current technology (better lenses, no AA-filter etc.), that would be even more true.
I have one of those as well, also a pretty competent machine, especially for it's time.

 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Hanging in my living room are two of my exhibition prints from 2009. Both photos were made between 2006 and 2008, exactly when I'd have to look up to find. :)


Both are 13 inches on the short side, printed area. The one on the left was made with the Pentax *ist DS 6 Mpixel using Pentax-FA77mm f/1.8 Limited lens, the one on the right was made with the Olympus E-1 using Zuiko Digital 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5 ED lens. Both won recognition and awards in the event.

Neither has any problem with pixelation, detailing, or tonal range presented at this size. I've done a couple a little larger from the same cameras (up to 20x24"). I've also seen Jon Isaac's Olympus E-1 exhibition prints, presented at more than double this size—and they are spectacularly beautiful!

What you produce with a camera, any camera, is really up to your eye, your imagination, and your skill at rendering it. There are technical advantages to higher resolution, yes. But sometimes I think much of modern photography is lost in the technical advantages and lacks a larger part of what great photographs should have.

I say this as I bend my head around the notion of finally acquiring a 50 Mpixel Hasselblad X1D. It is important not to lose sight of what is really important in a great photograph, way beyond the mere technical details of its creation.

G

"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure."
 
Top