MEGAPIXELS Don't Matter. Here is why.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ต.ค. 2024
- 📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexp...
24, 61, 100 mega pixels? How many megapixels do you really need to create incredible photos?
Well, when I first dove into photography, I wanted the highest megapixel camera on the market. I thought I needed it to create good photos and frankly, I wanted a fancy camera so it looked like I knew what I was doing when hanging out with other photographers.
And spoiler alert, this is dumb.
I know, I know, it's easy to get seduced by those massive megapixel numbers on the latest camera bodies, but trust me, bigger isn't always better.
So lets get into it.
#photographytips #landscapephotography #photography
📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/
Back in 2004 I took a photo of my sons with a Canon Powershot S5 which is 5mp and at work we had a colour plotter (used for plotting drawings), so I thought I plot one of his outdoor portrait on A0 normal plan paper and to my surprise it was fantastic. Even today I look at the plot and I am amazed that it was done by a 5mp camera. So, to this day, I am still using my Nikon D700 and happily print 8x12 and 16x12 prints. I have no plans in spending thousands on new cameras unless my D700 packs it in.
If you walk up close to a billboard, you'll quickly see why megapixels alone don't matter, it’s all about perspective! When it comes to high-resolution sensors, the quality of the image starts and ends with the lens. No matter how many megapixels a camera has, there’s a limit to what the glass can resolve. Once that limit is reached, adding more megapixels just results in a blurry mass of extra data, rather than capturing any new detail. Like trying to see more detail through a frosted glass.
I am a hobbyist, I bought an A7RV about 3weeks ago from an A7III - I noticed my shots looked better AND worse going up from the 20mp A7II sensor to 61mp sensor - I became so much more privy to image sharpness, and the lacking detail of my lenses, I noticed low iso artifacts more easily and tbh it just made casual photography a lot harder.
I own both 45 and 24 megapixel cameras, but I frequently use the 24mp camera for casual photography. Since I don't print my photos and rarely crop them, the 24mp resolution suits my needs perfectly. The files are smaller, which saves space and makes editing smoother. Unless photography is your profession, the main reason to opt for a higher megapixel camera would be if you frequently crop your images. With 24mp, you can do some cropping without significant quality loss, especially if you're only sharing photos online.
Still using my full frame Canon 5D mk1 from 2005. it's had a good life.
The analogies in this one were great! Helped someone that knows nothing understand what you were on about
Cheers dude!
Thank you for a very illuminating summary
Glad you enjoyed the video Chris. Thanks for the comment!
I just shoot Medium Format 120 film. Don't need to worry about megapixels
you need to worry about exposure instead lol
This was some great info.
So question to you is: I have a z6iii but really considering to go back to my OM-1 for the inbody stacking and live composition. If I do this, will see any image quality differences? I do landscape with some macro and wildlife and street. I don’t do video. Or just keep my new system and discover its possibilities. (Looking for your opinion) I occasionally print up to 2x24’s.
But that’s about it. I’m not selling any photos, but maybe one day.
Looking at all the videos out there my brain is overwhelmed.
Will the OM-1 help you get the picture? Getting the picture is way more important than the small difference in image quality.
You will with less light, but LC is unique. So, OM can give you lightness and functions, that III cańt. But Subject Recognition is better on your Nikon, use both, were they are at their best.
lol... 300dpi (or ppi depending on who you talk to) is useful if you're holding a print in your hand and looking at it from less than a couple feet away, otherwise, how many pixels per inch you actually need drops dramatically as you step away from the print to the point that if you're more than 4-5 feet away from the print, it looks totally fine, even at sub 100 pixels per inch. Don't believe me? Here's a simple test. We all have HDTVs right? That's 1920x1080 pixels. If you have an HDTV that is approximately 46 inches diagonal, you have a pixel density of about 46 pixels per inch. From 5-6 feet away, it looks pretty crispy doesn't it? Oh gosh, you have a 4K UHDTV? You've doubled your pixel density to about 90 pixels per inch then. Still less 100 pixels per inch and still looks fabulous from most distances except right up on it. The same applies for prints.
Where having more resolution can be helpful when cropping, or if doing any kind of extensive post processing.
I really need 6mpx. 12 is just for cropping.
In the "good old 😊 I used a 6 MP Nikon D70, and I was able to have a3 paper prints.
Of course, with my now 24 MP Nikon D5300 and D780 the prints will be better, still, cropping is still possible while I can still have a large enough print, even when this means a print of 250dpi and not 300dpi.
The main disadvantage of large size pictures is that the computer is quickly full, and thus, 24 MP is fine for me.
I think you spent about a half of the video making a strong case for higher megapixels! 😄
The principle of moving further back to view a larger print is true but has limitations in regard to DPI. You can easily and comfortably view an 8x10 print and print two or three times that size at the same distance. And just like with a painting, even a very large one, a print can be appreciated up close and at a natural viewing distance. Watch people viewing large Ansel Adam's prints. They will stand back and they will move in close.
General question .. Subtracting the crop factor and application as advised what are your thoughts on M43 Linux GH4 . In your experience from every day ( if used ) to landscape … Thank you !!!!!
My camera has only 24 mp Canon R3 it seems like it can do all types of photography, love it .....Great video thank you, Colin Devon uk...
Thanks for the comment Colin. R3 is an awesome camera!
does the quality of the lenses matter in sharpness?
Oh yes. The greater the MP the better the lense needs to be optically. So higher cost, higher weight ( most, not always).
Wildlife shooters often have to crop, because you can get only just so close. Especially in the case of small, skittish birds, filling the frame with the subject is often very difficult and can even be impossible. What if your subject is on the other side of the river? A tiny little bird at 3% of the frame may require significant cropping to adequately display the subject of the image. Landscape is a different category. Similarly for astrophotography. I never want to be put in a box as to what I need to do what I want, because those characterizations are literally always wrong. Sometimes I need a film camera just because I like the non-hurried approach forced by film and the fun film possibilities like lomo purple, Adox CMS II, or Ilford Delta 3200. Sometimes I need a macro lens for photographing insects or flowers. Sometimes I need a fast portrait lens (or even a bunch of them). Sometimes I need a long fast telephoto lens. So what I want is defined by two things: What I like and what I want to accomplish.
So, as is always the case, the answer to any photography question depends on the person and what they want to achieve.
I have a 50MP camera, and once in a while I wish it were 100MP. But 100MP cameras don't have good long fast telephoto lenses. So there you are.
Sensor Size ✅
Megapixels 📉
*_Edit:_*_ It might be a little confusing with that saying, what I'm trying to convey is a Less MP with a Big Sensor Size would always be better than a Small Sensor Size with a high MP 😉_
Benefits of Less Megapixels:
-Better Frame Rate (Buffer can be cleared faster)
-Smaller File Size
-Slightly better low light performance
I think you'll get a few people being angry saying that but you might be right...
@@Photography-Explained Oop- It might be a little confusing with that saying, what I'm trying to convey is a Less MP with a Big Sensor Size would always be better than a Small Sensor Size with a high MP 😉
Not that much of a pixel peeper here hahahah
I know what you're saying :). I just think lots of people will be jumping in here shortly arguing that their camera system is best regardless of reality.