WPF - World Photography Forum
Home Gallery Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts

Welcome to World Photography Forum!
Welcome!

Thank you for finding your way to World Photography Forum, a dedicated community for photographers and enthusiasts. There's a variety of forums, a wonderful gallery, and what's more, we are absolutely FREE. You are very welcome to join, take part in the discussion, and post your pictures!

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.


Go Back   World Photography Forum > Photography Equipment > Cameras


Cameras Discussion on Cameras of all types

how many MP do you really need?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 12-08-09, 15:08
postcardcv's Avatar
postcardcv postcardcv is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norfolk
Age: 48
Posts: 1,856
Default how many MP do you really need?

I know that MP count comes up a lot, it seems that many casual shooters hold to the belief that more is better, but those who shoot more aren't so bothered by it. It seems that unless you are shooting for huge print sizes then a 6mp camera should hold up just fine. I have recently had some 20"x30" prints done of photos taken on 8mp and 10mp cameras and they all look great, even when viewed close up. There is also a lot of talk that higher mp cameras perform less well at high ISOs, so why have I just bought a 15mp 1.6x crop camera...?

My main camera is a 16mp full frame which I love and the second body is an 8mp cropper (a EOS 30D). Last week I was offered a used 50D at a reasonable price and as I had some cash in my camera fund I went for it. It arrived yesterday and has some improvements on the 30D from a usability point of view so it looks like a good choice. So I decided to take a test shot to try and see how much use the extra 7mp (almost double that of the 30D) is likely to be. Attached are unsharpened test shots from each camera, first is just resized and second is a 100% crop to show how much detail each has captured. Shots were taken at f8, 1/50th, ISO400 on a tripod through a 180 macro lens.

To my eyes the shot out of the 50D looks slightly sharper in the full version (though the slightly different exposures may have effected this impression), on the crops it is clear that the 50D is recording slightly more fine detail as would be expected. The advantage of the extra 7mp isn't huge, I reckon that a 8mp camera will do the job fine the vast majority of the time.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 30D_full.jpg (194.6 KB, 18 views)
File Type: jpg 50D_full.jpg (211.6 KB, 17 views)
File Type: jpg 30D_crop.jpg (124.3 KB, 21 views)
File Type: jpg 50D_crop.jpg (151.8 KB, 22 views)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-08-09, 18:18
Birdsnapper's Avatar
Birdsnapper Birdsnapper is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lincs
Posts: 5,667
Default

I couldn't really tell the difference between the first two pixel-peeping ay 500% with FastStone. Both camera pretty impressive - especially given the ISO400 setting. Any Chance of a comparrison at higher ISOs - 800 and 1600?
__________________
Mike
Nobody ever erected a statue of a critic
http://www.pbase.com/sunnycote
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-08-09, 19:26
yelvertoft's Avatar
yelvertoft yelvertoft is offline  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North Essex, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 8,486
Default

This was discussed in some detail here:
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...ead.php?t=2495
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-08-09, 19:50
gordon g gordon g is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Barnsley
Posts: 2,766
Default

'How many megapixels do you need?' always reminds me of my children: 'Dad, I need an icecream!' The point being that most of us most of the time dont need huge pixel counts for our usual outputs. 'Want' though is another matter
I would love to upgrade to the 1DsIII, but I really dont need the extra resolution, even though the newer processing engine, better high ISO performance and built-in sensor cleaning would be nice. (I can always find excuses for more kit, if only the money were as easy!)

Last edited by gordon g; 12-08-09 at 19:52.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-08-09, 22:07
postcardcv's Avatar
postcardcv postcardcv is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norfolk
Age: 48
Posts: 1,856
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdsnapper View Post
I couldn't really tell the difference between the first two pixel-peeping ay 500% with FastStone. Both camera pretty impressive - especially given the ISO400 setting. Any Chance of a comparrison at higher ISOs - 800 and 1600?
When I get the chance I'll do a three way comparison between the 30D, 40D and 50D at a range of ISOs... but it might have to wait until the school holidays are over!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.