Good explanation. Just look at what the professionals use....most are around 20 - 24 megapixles (eg Nikon D5 / Nikon D500 etc). Quality beats quantity every time :-)
A7s is example what is good quality camera which has only 12Mp what is totally enough and with full frame sensor it can even show galaxies nebulas in real time. Graphene CMOS sensor would be 10x more sensitive than current sensors.
Yeah, my cameras 16MP but the A7 beats in every other regard, I'd say anything above 8MP is perfectly fine for today so long as it has the features you want.
i take lewd pics for my gay friend i talk to on email and lets just say my camera with more megapixels than my phone took a sharper picture of my pipe compared to the older ones i took with my phone. which if your wondering my phone has 12MP camera while my camera has 20MP so more megapixels do matter in some ways. to not go into way TMI i will just say the SLR that had more megapixels had a amazing unbelievable quality while phone did fine.
Thats great thanks, I’ve been struggling with the idea of how a full frame 20Mp camera could be better than a 24Mp crop sensor. Thanks for the explanation.
Forget megapixels what counts is having the camera with you. I think it was David Bailey who said "The Olympus trip that is with you is a better camera than the Hasselblad that's been left in the studio"!
yet I am still trying to get my head around if a Canon EOS 750D is better than my Canon EOS 700D The only thing with mine my Megapixels is 18 and the 750D has a 24.2 so really does Megapixels make an image better or does it depend on the lens type you use?
Thanks Joe. I have a Canon 5D oldish with about 12.8 pix. I am starting Macro stuff; so maybe the pixels would make a difference here??? Your video helped me to evaluate my camera in a favourable way. Also your english is understandable, unlike many others I have listened to. Thankyou.
I love these videos joe :) you seem really calm in the video and it looks like you enjoy making these types of informative videos more than those fake trolling videos, stick to these vids I'm loving the content you're putting out on the channel :)
It seems I got an idea because I have now a 13mp+5mp on my rear cam phone but whenever I checked the image quality it seems that it has so many noise on it. Hmn 🤔 and thinking why this happen that it makes me so sad to look that I believe that having more mp can make the image looks so good but it was.wrong
I'm watching this video because I don't understand how megapixels work, for example Google Pixel has 12MP and the Motorola Z has 20, and everyone says that the Google Pixel it's best smartphone camera ever. Can someone explain me this?
John Velez it also depends on the lens (on camera) and the "resolution" upscaled and/or dowlscaled . . . Also the rgb type thing plays a role . . . Hope i kinda helped
I just came across a scenario that I find confusing. "Effective Megapixels." I understand cropping a 20 megapixel full frame to APSC creates a loss of megapixels. BUT...what I did not know, apparently, is that your lens, even if it is a full frame lens on a full frame sensor or a APSC lens on an APSC sensor, still isn't giving you the full image on your sensor. I don't understand this. It would seem that some lenses offer more megapixel coverage on your sensor giving you more effective megapixels than others. So, let's say, you have a 20 megapixel camera, but your lens is only giving you an effective megapixel of 9 megapixels. What? Can someone explain this? Go to DXOmark and you'll get an idea of why I found this perplexing.
I would rather sacrifice quality over practicality. I absolutely hate to be recharging my canon batteries over and over again. And if you want to get new lenses you have to spend an arm and a leg. No thanks. I’ll stick to my iPhone. So portable, just as good and increases my workflow to a higher degree. Big bulky and ultra expensive lenses and cameras are not sexy at all. And they are way too heavy.
Sir, in my channel TechTerms ,I post short animated videos. I try to make people understand day-to-day used technical terms by using animations only. I work hard to design the animations but low views makes me so much depress. What should i do? Please help me. I am B.tech in ECE passed out in 2016. I want to work on youtube but i am facing the problem of less views.
People at Walmart stores are easily suckered into the trend of buying what they think to be an upgrade to 20 or 20.1 megapixels, but in reality their 16 megapixel they have now won't be much of a noticeable difference at all. Unless maybe they crop it in closely to view any distorted image qualities in megapixel or image overall quality!! from afar, you'd never notice any difference! Now if you are talking about an upgrade from a Compaq to a Bridge ( next to no difference! ), or... Bridge to DSLR then yes!! definite difference mainly due to the size of the sensors or lens! The larger the camera sensor size, thus more light is allowed into the camera allowing clearer more precise detailed shots and quality! Then the difference is noticeable even from a small megapixel upgrade! "Amateur Photographer for 6+ years! " Thank You.
Talking opinion and not tech seems to be your thing. I shoot a 2006 DSLR with 6Mp and it is better than my 2018 Note8 on every level. If I could destroy the like button, I mean literally destroy it, I would.
1:06 that image is just SO WRONG. Shot noise (the main source of noise in camera) is directly related to how much light you can capture, and since it obeys a poisson distribution the signal to noise ratio in an image is calculated taking the square root of the number of photoelectrons captured by the sensor (example, if 1000 pixels reach your sensor you have a SNR of about 31)... and that is given ONLY by the area of the sensor, pixel size doesn't matter, stop spreading that misinformation. Mobile phones are bad in low light because their sensor is small, not because the pixels are small, there is a difference. Mobile phones pixels HAVE to be small because the sensor, is smaller but 1 square millimiter of mobile phone sensor is just as good (if not better since technology goes so fast) at capturing light as a square millimiter of DSLR sensor. Real world examples? A nikon D4 with 16mpx has almost identical (if not worse) noise performance compared to a 24mpx D750, which is almost equivalent to a 36mpx D810a... and if you don't belive me just go and watch the comparsion on DPReview...
I absolutely agree with what you are saying, what you are saying makes a lot of sense! I have 2 Canon DSLRs, EOS 30D that I have had since 2006, (now I am keeping him as a spare) and EOS 70D. Both the 30D, and 70D have the same size sensor, 23 Point Something Millimeter, 30D has 8.2 megapixels, 70D has 20 megapixels, and my 70D significantly out performs my 30D, takes seriously better quality images. If what the speakers is saying was true, my 70D with nearly 3X more pixels packed into the same size sensor should be INFERIOR to my 30D. Pixel count does make a huge difference in your ability to produce an image that can be printed at a large size, but pixel count is not the only thing that matters, what also matters is the quality of the camera's processor, for example Canon 70D has a more advanced processor than the 30D, and the fact it produces a larger file size makes a huge difference as well, better color reproduction, better print size capability, etc. I agree with you to a point about sensor size, of course the tiny size of a cellphone camera sensor is going to be inferior at gathering light to an APS-C sensor, or a 35MM sensor. But, is it really just about sensor size, or could it also have to do with the material a sensor is made of. For example, in comparisons of 35MM sensor cameras from Nikon, Canon, and Sony, Sony's 35MM sensor cameras have been shown to perform SUPERIOR in low light settings than both, Canon, and Nikon, in other words (at least according to articles I have read) if you use a Sony 35MM sensor camera outside at night, or indoors, WITHOUT A FLASH, you will not need to use as high of an ISO setting as you will with a Nikon, or Canon 35MM sensor camera, that is what the tech reviewers are claiming anyway. So if it is true, that Sony's full frame cameras perform better than Canon, or Nikon's Full Frame Cameras, all 3 have the exact same size sensor, could we not logically conclude that sensor size is not the only thing that determines a camera's light gathering ability? And if there are other factors that determine a camera's light gathering ability besides just sensor size, such as the material the sensor is made of, than what is Sony doing so different from Canon, and Nikon, what is their camera sensors made? How is that material more light sensitive than the materials Nikon, and Canon are using to make their sensors, and why are Canon, and Nikon not using the material Sony is using?
Yes and no, what I have told you is not the full story. Strictly speaking, the ability to capture MORE LIGHT (that's THE REAL SENSITIVITY OF A SENSOR, ISO is just an amplification of the signal, you dont' get more light dialing up the ISO value) is just determined by the quantum efficiency of the sensor, that is a percentage of how many photons that hit the sensor are turned into photoelectrons. Quantum efficiency is about 50% atm, but it's a number that doesn't change too much between each generation of cameras, maybe it goes up by 1% or 2% but that's all. There is another factor that I didn't state in my first comment because it wasn't important in that case but that's actually what makes a camera from 2016 outperform a camera from 2008: amount of light captured isnt' everything, you also must consider the amount of dark current (that is the amount of spur electron circulting in the sensor because of heat that contribute to add noise) and more impotant the READ NOISE, that is how accurately the sensor can translate the amount of photoelectrons captured into a number that goes into the final RAW image (also called ADU, Analog to Digital Unit). The better cameras become the lower those two values get, that's why your 30D is outperformed by the 70D: the 70D simply has lower dark current and much lower read noise, while quantum efficiency is probably similar the 70D can just read the signal better. It's actually a misconception that Canon sensors are bad in low light, actually before the D810a came out the most widely used (and tbh it's probably still the most used since the D810a is so damn expansive) DSLR by professional astrophotographers was the Canon 6D that came out in 2012! It was later slightly outperformed in low light by the sony A7s but being a mirrorless it has some drawbacks (mostly reliability, toughness and battery life) so most people just kept using the 6D. Now the best camera in low light is the 20,8mpx Nikon D5, and funny fact the sensor isn't made by Sony but from Nikon itself (and no, it's not better because it goes to 3 million ISO cuz that's just bullshit marketing, it's better because it's cleaner than the A7s with the same ISO settings, that's all). Also, the D810a uses the same sensor from the D810 but it's much cleaner because it's "calibrated" in a different way from the normal D810... however D810 that oupterforms the D810a at low ISO! Canon cameras before the recent 5DMkIV and 1DxII were bad at LOW ISO because of high read noise compared to Nik/Sony, but at high ISO they've always been on pair if not better ;) The charateristic of modern Sony sensors is that they have small read noise both at low ISO and at high ISO and that allows you to have a huge DR at low ISO (see A7r II and Nikon D810), but the more you amplify the signal (that is rising ISO) the lower read noise become, so cameras like the 6D that are MEH at LOW ISO can end up outperforming other models at HIGH ISO. The 6D has also a very low dark current level that helps a lot in astrophotography long exposures.
Hey you should consider doing a lecture on your channel, this is some very valuable information you're sharing, this is my first time learning about dark matter in sensors, and read noise, and this is the kind of information that all professionals should know. When you say Canon 6D out performs, Sony and Nikon at slow shutter speeds, do you mean slow shutter speeds at 100 ISO, or do you mean long exposure regardless of ISO setting?
BubuSnow93 Regarding Nikon D5 is that Does that camera seriously have an ISO range of up to 3 Million? I would think with an ISO range like that, one could potentially avoid ever having to use a flash indoors, and get great shots at night outdoors at night, so what am I missing here? Are you saying with that high of an ISO range that at 6400 ISO, it will not perform any better than my 70D? If so why?
BubuSnow93 By the way, when I was in Los Angeles on a business trip recently, (video work ironically, using my 70D as camera B, XC10 as Camera A) I took an evening shot of what I call the Lone Tree. I call him the Lone Tree because he is one tree all by himself surrounded by 3 broadcast towers, I'm not sure if they are television, or radio, or which. That is on the East Side of LA in an industrial area. Those are the kind of shots I live for, evening shots, I love shooting at night! It is a lot of fun shooting something that gives of flashing lights like broadcast towers do, their flashing red lights. (Broadcast towers have flashing red lights to prevent airplanes from crashing into them). I am not happy with the shot I got because I did not have my Tripod with me at the time (I know I should have, but it's hindsight now), so it was a handheld shoot, at half second shutter speed, and 6400 ISO, which is half of the camera's Native ISO (70D's Native ISO goes to 12,800). Had I had my Tripod with, I would have shot it at 100 ISO, and 13 aperture for the depth of field, and would have did probably a 6 minute exposure. The reason I would do that long of an exposure is the same reason I had to set the camera at 6400 ISO for hand holding in that scene. I avoid using my tripod whenever possible because I don't the burden of carrying it around so I am very skilled at holding a camera still, I can do it longer than most, not saying that to brag, it is just a skill I have acquired over the years, I can hold still down to a half second shutter speed with a lens with vibration reduction, without that feature I can hold still down to a 20 shutter speed, below 20 is a struggle. I mention that to make the point, the reason I am not happy with the shot I got is not because there is camera shake blur, I am not happy that I had to use that damn high of an ISO setting, and consequently not have a shot that can be blown up to a large print size if I ever wanted to. That's okay, that gives me a reason to make a future trip to Los Angeles soon......
Oh it works like a lever, the more pixels the more processing power required to get great image The less the pixels it has the better the quality but then you get a very small image
My D700 is only 12mp and I can’t deny that the images from it are gorgeous and even better with proper glass attached...I have a D800E has 36.3 and if there’s a little bit of camera shake it will definitely show because there’s so much resolution. Do there are drawbacks for higher resolution. Not saying they’re bad but 24 seems to be the sweet spot 12-16 perfectly totally fine
Not really, and here's why. If you're going to be printing on large surface areas and still retain the detail then yes mega pixels will be relevant. But if you're going to be taking those god-awful selfies for social media then anything more than at most 8 mega pixels is pointless. The majority of today's picture takers only ever use pictures for online use and never actually print them which means that your 16 or 20mp camera's are just a waste for their true potential. You are better off having less megapixels that are larger over a surface area because they will collect more light which as we all know makes a picture look better rather than having a ton of them crammed into a small surface area.
i mean, you are on the right track, but what you are saying is nothing new; I already saw a few photographers talking about this..better keep a direction and stick to it, if you like photo, talk about photo, if you like sound, talk about sound, same for it, gaming, physics, computer performance, even deleting sys32;)
I would like to ask two questions first of all I've got image quality super fine fine normal also I've got image resolution at 2 and 3.2 m 4 m and 5 m what's best to use Samsung mobile phone Samsung fame thanks
I know that this is a little off topic, but I am creating DVDs with UHD content from a Galaxy S7 phone and would say it is the best camera that I have ever had for $300. My only complaint is that there is a 4GB recording limit due to the heat generated by UHD processing. You reach that in about 10 minutes. I would like to find a camcorder that can match the UHD performance without the file size / recording time limit. This should be around the same price too. Not professional, but high end consumer. Till then I just use my phone and do a lot of patchwork in post production editing.
Hope you are still there. I have 2 Samsung digital hand held cameras. One (WB250F) takes pictures at 14.2 Megapixels the other (ST66) takes pictures at 16.1 Megapixels. What one will (On Average) take a higher quality picture?
Good morrning. If the size of each individual pixel makes the photo better or worse, than a camera with a FF sensor and 20mp will be better than a camera with a FF sensor and 50mp? See, to "fill" a FF sensor with 20mp you will need bigger individual pixels than you would need to fill the same sensor with more megapixels, so, the camera with fewer megapixels will have bigger individual pixel. Hope the best of luck.
The other major key factor is lens quality. I have a dslr (24mp) the image quality is so much sharper with a prime lens than it is with very slightly less quality zoom lens. most noticeable when cropping later on.
Hello im feel regret and confuse my new sony nex5t mirrorless. But im so obssesed with canon d700 can you give me some advise what is diffirent these camera, mirrorless vs dslr for my peace of mine and i appreciate it. beacause i use it in video rec.thank you
Hey, see if you can help me... I need to do videos footages without zoom, and then on a editor, I want to zoom in some parts... When I do that, I don't have much quality, the images get blur... What should I look into a camera to be able to zoom in on a editor and still get good quality?
Dear thiojoe, im really bored of you videos and i ask you to make them more exciting, you sound way too monotone and theres a lack of comedy. That was just my opinion and my critism.
In a DSLR more pixels is/are better, because you have interchangable lenses and some are more or less efficient than others. Depending on the lens your 20 mp sensor might be giving you only 15 mp. None give you the full 20, btw. So while I don't buy for megapixels, if I can get more, I'll take them.
If size of the Sensor is the real issue then How are smartphones doing it. Is it more of the alogorithm they use and if so does that phase out that the Sensor size matters?
If i understand this correctly, there is a trade off between mp and the size of the pixes, with bigger pixel making better images because its more light sensitive?
so is there a huge difference between 24 megapixels and 6? i’m deciding between betting a Canon rebel t7 or a Nikon D40x, which one takes better pictures
You should always look for a camera that is a right fit for you. You should make sure that the picture quality and the right megapixels are the ones that you will use. There is no need to buy a camera that will only be used to get the job done.
Thank you so much!!!! I am actually looking to upgrade from a mirrorless camera entry level to a DSLR. My goal is to photograph flowers and landscaping. Which one would you recommend Nikon D810 or Nikon D850?
It would be helpful to not only explain the difference but show the steps what it would look like comparing devices on a site and discerning the tech specs which relate to your vid.
is it really sensor size? assuming same lens size, the amount of light captured will be the same for a camera with small sensor and camera with large sensor. there are more lens that do the work of focussing the light onto the sensor so even for small pixels, the light is just more concentrated. so isnt it the lens size that matters? how much light is let into the camera in the first place?
Hey Joe, just got here in this channel, I don't know if you already made a video about, but I wonder, if Intel was about to release a new processor, how do you think it would be? Thank you
Great, that explains why my 5mp Sony takes a lot better pictures than my 18mp Canon. The 18mp is a joke because in three years I have never been able to get a picture over 3mp from it.
Good explanation. Just look at what the professionals use....most are around 20 - 24 megapixles (eg Nikon D5 / Nikon D500 etc). Quality beats quantity every time :-)
Its because they are too poor to afford anything higher.
ok I will try to find a 0.3 megapixel camera
you didn´t get the point.
@Alexander Dewanto I did
🙄🤐
R/whooosh
Waluilli Team Tryhard shut up nigga
A7s is example what is good quality camera which has only 12Mp what is totally enough and with full frame sensor it can even show galaxies nebulas in real time. Graphene CMOS sensor would be 10x more sensitive than current sensors.
Yeah, my cameras 16MP but the A7 beats in every other regard, I'd say anything above 8MP is perfectly fine for today so long as it has the features you want.
I've been researching cameras and lenses for 2 weeks and this is the first time I've heard of medium format. A new path to go down. Thank you Joe!
No megapixels are overrated and are mainly, unprofessionally, used as a selling/marketing ploy.
i take lewd pics for my gay friend i talk to on email and lets just say my camera with more megapixels than my phone took a sharper picture of my pipe compared to the older ones i took with my phone. which if your wondering my phone has 12MP camera while my camera has 20MP so more megapixels do matter in some ways. to not go into way TMI i will just say the SLR that had more megapixels had a amazing unbelievable quality while phone did fine.
@@FreeAimDog reported.
@@vg6761 thats homophobic and youtube wont support homophobs so...
@@FreeAimDog banned.
@@vg6761 nope because i follow every guideline and only upload gameplay so im good.
hey dude im watching ur video in 480p and ur face still looks good
Lol same
I watch in 144p
Yeah,I'm so surprised when I found I am using 480p. I thought I was using at least 720p60, the quality of the picture is excellent !
1080p is god tier😂
😁😂
I tried downloading some megapixels to my computer it didn't work???????? Please help theo??????,!!!!!!!!!?!!!!! 111111!!1!1!1!1!111!!!!one11111!!!!!!
so funny
so hilarious
be kind and remove all those spaces from your name!!!
+ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟRandom Stranger i check out yo channel and its pretty dank so I subbed
+ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟ ᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟᅟRandom Stranger GOD DAMN YOU JUST CHANGE YOUR USERNAME!
You cant download megapixels IDIOT!
I have 12 megapixels front and back. I feel like that's a perfect amount.
Thats great thanks, I’ve been struggling with the idea of how a full frame 20Mp camera could be better than a 24Mp crop sensor. Thanks for the explanation.
For the first few seconds I though I was watching an ad. 😂😂😂
LMAO SAME xD !!!
5 years later, even after IPhone 13 released, content is still valid.
Forget megapixels what counts is having the camera with you. I think it was David Bailey who said "The Olympus trip that is with you is a better camera than the Hasselblad that's been left in the studio"!
yet I am still trying to get my head around if a Canon EOS 750D is better than my Canon EOS 700D
The only thing with mine my Megapixels is 18 and the 750D has a 24.2 so really does Megapixels make an image better or does it depend on the lens type you use?
Did you find out?
Still using a 10MP DSLR Canon Camera from 2008, still going strong
But the dynamic range sucks!
Thanks Joe. I have a Canon 5D oldish with about 12.8 pix.
I am starting Macro stuff; so maybe the pixels would make a difference here???
Your video helped me to evaluate my camera in a favourable way.
Also your english is understandable, unlike many others I have listened to.
Thankyou.
This is so out of the blue but your eyes is so beautiful
Basically what I understood after watching this video was that megapixels means everything.
or nothing.
I love these videos joe :) you seem really calm in the video and it looks like you enjoy making these types of informative videos more than those fake trolling videos, stick to these vids I'm loving the content you're putting out on the channel :)
This is a fake trolling video too I think. More MP does not mean more noise.
@@jimmysyar889 he never said that lol
@@despareint yes he did? What???
@@jimmysyar889 where?
@@despareint saying that more MP means smaller pixels = more noise. That’s just false.
Can’t tell if you’re shooting with a green screen or your lens is hella fast
so does it mean more pixels camera has better detail but more noise and less pixels camera has worse detail and less noise?
Exactly
Most of these just comes down to the sensor size
in a way, but it also means that images that are enlarged for printing will retain the same quality in larger size as they did in smaller size.
Don't forget different sensor have different noise performance and also different camera have different noise reduction performance 😉
It seems I got an idea because I have now a 13mp+5mp on my rear cam phone but whenever I checked the image quality it seems that it has so many noise on it. Hmn 🤔 and thinking why this happen that it makes me so sad to look that I believe that having more mp can make the image looks so good but it was.wrong
I'm watching this video because I don't understand how megapixels work, for example Google Pixel has 12MP and the Motorola Z has 20, and everyone says that the Google Pixel it's best smartphone camera ever. Can someone explain me this?
John Velez it also depends on the lens (on camera) and the "resolution" upscaled and/or dowlscaled . . . Also the rgb type thing plays a role . . . Hope i kinda helped
Thank you lol my go pro hero 4 has 12mp and my Sony experia has 23mp yet I feel the gopro takes better images
I just came across a scenario that I find confusing. "Effective Megapixels." I understand cropping a 20 megapixel full frame to APSC creates a loss of megapixels. BUT...what I did not know, apparently, is that your lens, even if it is a full frame lens on a full frame sensor or a APSC lens on an APSC sensor, still isn't giving you the full image on your sensor. I don't understand this. It would seem that some lenses offer more megapixel coverage on your sensor giving you more effective megapixels than others. So, let's say, you have a 20 megapixel camera, but your lens is only giving you an effective megapixel of 9 megapixels. What? Can someone explain this? Go to DXOmark and you'll get an idea of why I found this perplexing.
I would rather sacrifice quality over practicality. I absolutely hate to be recharging my canon batteries over and over again. And if you want to get new lenses you have to spend an arm and a leg. No thanks. I’ll stick to my iPhone. So portable, just as good and increases my workflow to a higher degree. Big bulky and ultra expensive lenses and cameras are not sexy at all. And they are way too heavy.
Sir, in my channel TechTerms ,I post short animated videos.
I try to make people understand day-to-day used technical terms by using animations only.
I work hard to design the animations but low views makes me so much depress.
What should i do? Please help me. I am B.tech in ECE passed out in 2016. I want to work on youtube but i am facing the problem of less views.
People at Walmart stores are easily suckered into the trend of buying what they think to be an upgrade to 20 or 20.1 megapixels, but in reality their 16 megapixel they have now won't be much of a noticeable difference at all. Unless maybe they crop it in closely to view any distorted image qualities in megapixel or image overall quality!! from afar, you'd never notice any difference! Now if you are talking about an upgrade from a Compaq to a Bridge ( next to no difference! ), or... Bridge to DSLR then yes!! definite difference mainly due to the size of the sensors or lens! The larger the camera sensor size, thus more light is allowed into the camera allowing clearer more precise detailed shots and quality! Then the difference is noticeable even from a small megapixel upgrade! "Amateur Photographer for 6+ years! " Thank You.
A5100 have overheat issue is that really true ? Sorry for out of topic
i have 16 mp front and back
Talking opinion and not tech seems to be your thing.
I shoot a 2006 DSLR with 6Mp and it is better than my 2018 Note8 on every level.
If I could destroy the like button, I mean literally destroy it, I would.
i rechecked that i am on thiojoe or thiojoe tech. :| So Scared
Who else is watching coz they cant afford the Sony A1 full frame and only have a 24mp apsc sensor camera trying to justify but still cant lol
1:06 that image is just SO WRONG.
Shot noise (the main source of noise in camera) is directly related to how much light you can capture, and since it obeys a poisson distribution the signal to noise ratio in an image is calculated taking the square root of the number of photoelectrons captured by the sensor (example, if 1000 pixels reach your sensor you have a SNR of about 31)... and that is given ONLY by the area of the sensor, pixel size doesn't matter, stop spreading that misinformation.
Mobile phones are bad in low light because their sensor is small, not because the pixels are small, there is a difference. Mobile phones pixels HAVE to be small because the sensor, is smaller but 1 square millimiter of mobile phone sensor is just as good (if not better since technology goes so fast) at capturing light as a square millimiter of DSLR sensor.
Real world examples? A nikon D4 with 16mpx has almost identical (if not worse) noise performance compared to a 24mpx D750, which is almost equivalent to a 36mpx D810a... and if you don't belive me just go and watch the comparsion on DPReview...
I absolutely agree with what you are saying, what you are saying makes a lot of sense! I have 2 Canon DSLRs, EOS 30D that I have had since 2006, (now I am keeping him as a spare) and EOS 70D. Both the 30D, and 70D have the same size sensor, 23 Point Something Millimeter, 30D has 8.2 megapixels, 70D has 20 megapixels, and my 70D significantly out performs my 30D, takes seriously better quality images.
If what the speakers is saying was true, my 70D with nearly 3X more pixels packed into the same size sensor should be INFERIOR to my 30D.
Pixel count does make a huge difference in your ability to produce an image that can be printed at a large size, but pixel count is not the only thing that matters, what also matters is the quality of the camera's processor, for example Canon 70D has a more advanced processor than the 30D, and the fact it produces a larger file size makes a huge difference as well, better color reproduction, better print size capability, etc.
I agree with you to a point about sensor size, of course the tiny size of a cellphone camera sensor is going to be inferior at gathering light to an APS-C sensor, or a 35MM sensor.
But, is it really just about sensor size, or could it also have to do with the material a sensor is made of.
For example, in comparisons of 35MM sensor cameras from Nikon, Canon, and Sony, Sony's 35MM sensor cameras have been shown to perform SUPERIOR in low light settings than both, Canon, and Nikon, in other words (at least according to articles I have read) if you use a Sony 35MM sensor camera outside at night, or indoors, WITHOUT A FLASH, you will not need to use as high of an ISO setting as you will with a Nikon, or Canon 35MM sensor camera, that is what the tech reviewers are claiming anyway.
So if it is true, that Sony's full frame cameras perform better than Canon, or Nikon's Full Frame Cameras, all 3 have the exact same size sensor, could we not logically conclude that sensor size is not the only thing that determines a camera's light gathering ability?
And if there are other factors that determine a camera's light gathering ability besides just sensor size, such as the material the sensor is made of, than what is Sony doing so different from Canon, and Nikon, what is their camera sensors made? How is that material more light sensitive than the materials Nikon, and Canon are using to make their sensors, and why are Canon, and Nikon not using the material Sony is using?
Yes and no, what I have told you is not the full story.
Strictly speaking, the ability to capture MORE LIGHT (that's THE REAL SENSITIVITY OF A SENSOR, ISO is just an amplification of the signal, you dont' get more light dialing up the ISO value) is just determined by the quantum efficiency of the sensor, that is a percentage of how many photons that hit the sensor are turned into photoelectrons.
Quantum efficiency is about 50% atm, but it's a number that doesn't change too much between each generation of cameras, maybe it goes up by 1% or 2% but that's all.
There is another factor that I didn't state in my first comment because it wasn't important in that case but that's actually what makes a camera from 2016 outperform a camera from 2008: amount of light captured isnt' everything, you also must consider the amount of dark current (that is the amount of spur electron circulting in the sensor because of heat that contribute to add noise) and more impotant the READ NOISE, that is how accurately the sensor can translate the amount of photoelectrons captured into a number that goes into the final RAW image (also called ADU, Analog to Digital Unit).
The better cameras become the lower those two values get, that's why your 30D is outperformed by the 70D: the 70D simply has lower dark current and much lower read noise, while quantum efficiency is probably similar the 70D can just read the signal better.
It's actually a misconception that Canon sensors are bad in low light, actually before the D810a came out the most widely used (and tbh it's probably still the most used since the D810a is so damn expansive) DSLR by professional astrophotographers was the Canon 6D that came out in 2012! It was later slightly outperformed in low light by the sony A7s but being a mirrorless it has some drawbacks (mostly reliability, toughness and battery life) so most people just kept using the 6D.
Now the best camera in low light is the 20,8mpx Nikon D5, and funny fact the sensor isn't made by Sony but from Nikon itself (and no, it's not better because it goes to 3 million ISO cuz that's just bullshit marketing, it's better because it's cleaner than the A7s with the same ISO settings, that's all).
Also, the D810a uses the same sensor from the D810 but it's much cleaner because it's "calibrated" in a different way from the normal D810... however D810 that oupterforms the D810a at low ISO!
Canon cameras before the recent 5DMkIV and 1DxII were bad at LOW ISO because of high read noise compared to Nik/Sony, but at high ISO they've always been on pair if not better ;)
The charateristic of modern Sony sensors is that they have small read noise both at low ISO and at high ISO and that allows you to have a huge DR at low ISO (see A7r II and Nikon D810), but the more you amplify the signal (that is rising ISO) the lower read noise become, so cameras like the 6D that are MEH at LOW ISO can end up outperforming other models at HIGH ISO. The 6D has also a very low dark current level that helps a lot in astrophotography long exposures.
Hey you should consider doing a lecture on your channel, this is some very valuable information you're sharing, this is my first time learning about dark matter in sensors, and read noise, and this is the kind of information that all professionals should know.
When you say Canon 6D out performs, Sony and Nikon at slow shutter speeds, do you mean slow shutter speeds at 100 ISO, or do you mean long exposure regardless of ISO setting?
BubuSnow93 Regarding Nikon D5 is that Does that camera seriously have an ISO range of up to 3 Million? I would think with an ISO range like that, one could potentially avoid ever having to use a flash indoors, and get great shots at night outdoors at night, so what am I missing here?
Are you saying with that high of an ISO range that at 6400 ISO, it will not perform any better than my 70D? If so why?
BubuSnow93 By the way, when I was in Los Angeles on a business trip recently, (video work ironically, using my 70D as camera B, XC10 as Camera A) I took an evening shot of what I call the Lone Tree. I call him the Lone Tree because he is one tree all by himself surrounded by 3 broadcast towers, I'm not sure if they are television, or radio, or which. That is on the East Side of LA in an industrial area.
Those are the kind of shots I live for, evening shots, I love shooting at night! It is a lot of fun shooting something that gives of flashing lights like broadcast towers do, their flashing red lights. (Broadcast towers have flashing red lights to prevent airplanes from crashing into them).
I am not happy with the shot I got because I did not have my Tripod with me at the time (I know I should have, but it's hindsight now), so it was a handheld shoot, at half second shutter speed, and 6400 ISO, which is half of the camera's Native ISO (70D's Native ISO goes to 12,800).
Had I had my Tripod with, I would have shot it at 100 ISO, and 13 aperture for the depth of field, and would have did probably a 6 minute exposure.
The reason I would do that long of an exposure is the same reason I had to set the camera at 6400 ISO for hand holding in that scene.
I avoid using my tripod whenever possible because I don't the burden of carrying it around so I am very skilled at holding a camera still, I can do it longer than most, not saying that to brag, it is just a skill I have acquired over the years, I can hold still down to a half second shutter speed with a lens with vibration reduction, without that feature I can hold still down to a 20 shutter speed, below 20 is a struggle.
I mention that to make the point, the reason I am not happy with the shot I got is not because there is camera shake blur, I am not happy that I had to use that damn high of an ISO setting, and consequently not have a shot that can be blown up to a large print size if I ever wanted to.
That's okay, that gives me a reason to make a future trip to Los Angeles soon......
I have a new thing I just started, I just started unsubscribing from any TH-cam that I watch that says smash or destroy the like or subscribe button 😂
Oh it works like a lever, the more pixels the more processing power required to get great image
The less the pixels it has the better the quality but then you get a very small image
My D700 is only 12mp and I can’t deny that the images from it are gorgeous and even better with proper glass attached...I have a D800E has 36.3 and if there’s a little bit of camera shake it will definitely show because there’s so much resolution. Do there are drawbacks for higher resolution. Not saying they’re bad but 24 seems to be the sweet spot
12-16 perfectly totally fine
18?
You. Cannot. Compare. A. Fucking. Smartphone. Camera. To. A. DSLR.
Nice video. But doesn't have more in depth details on megapixel. Quite general.
I've taken pretty decent photos with only 3 to 5 megapixel
Not really, and here's why. If you're going to be printing on large surface areas and still retain the detail then yes mega pixels will be relevant. But if you're going to be taking those god-awful selfies for social media then anything more than at most 8 mega pixels is pointless. The majority of today's picture takers only ever use pictures for online use and never actually print them which means that your 16 or 20mp camera's are just a waste for their true potential. You are better off having less megapixels that are larger over a surface area because they will collect more light which as we all know makes a picture look better rather than having a ton of them crammed into a small surface area.
i mean, you are on the right track, but what you are saying is nothing new; I already saw a few photographers talking about this..better keep a direction and stick to it, if you like photo, talk about photo, if you like sound, talk about sound, same for it, gaming, physics, computer performance, even deleting sys32;)
I would like to ask two questions first of all I've got image quality super fine fine normal also I've got image resolution at 2 and 3.2 m 4 m and 5 m what's best to use Samsung mobile phone Samsung fame thanks
Looking at trail cameras. One with 18mp and one with 32. 18mp is priced 30 dollars less. Which will have best picture quality?
you didnt explain what ISO means
"Destroy that like button!" :D
why dont they make a camera with a single MP then?
Finally found a video that made sense of it
Very informative!! Thank you so much!!
Is Joe in front of a green screen? Or just really focused on him?
Green screen
+TheBananaCast2.0 This is not green screen. He is wearing green and blue shirt in this video. So it can't be even blue screen.
Then how come it moves sometimes in some videos?
BZG Bebiezazagamer face have some pink parts
Depth of field
I know that this is a little off topic, but I am creating DVDs with UHD content from a Galaxy S7 phone and would say it is the best camera that I have ever had for $300. My only complaint is that there is a 4GB recording limit due to the heat generated by UHD processing. You reach that in about 10 minutes. I would like to find a camcorder that can match the UHD performance without the file size / recording time limit. This should be around the same price too. Not professional, but high end consumer. Till then I just use my phone and do a lot of patchwork in post production editing.
Hope you are still there. I have 2 Samsung digital hand held cameras. One (WB250F) takes pictures at 14.2 Megapixels the other (ST66) takes pictures at 16.1 Megapixels. What one will (On Average) take a higher quality picture?
Actual examples/samples would be helpful.
So you were saying that huawei p20 that has 40 mp is worse than samsung galaxy j7 with 13 mp?
Good morrning. If the size of each individual pixel makes the photo better or worse, than a camera with a FF sensor and 20mp will be better than a camera with a FF sensor and 50mp? See, to "fill" a FF sensor with 20mp you will need bigger individual pixels than you would need to fill the same sensor with more megapixels, so, the camera with fewer megapixels will have bigger individual pixel.
Hope the best of luck.
More are better. But if a full frame fx has less than a dx the full frame camera with less MP is better. Blowing up a image more MP is good
The other major key factor is lens quality. I have a dslr (24mp) the image quality is so much sharper with a prime lens than it is with very slightly less quality zoom lens. most noticeable when cropping later on.
Hello im feel regret and confuse my new sony nex5t mirrorless. But im so obssesed with canon d700 can you give me some advise what is diffirent these camera, mirrorless vs dslr for my peace of mine and i appreciate it. beacause i use it in video rec.thank you
I only use a 16 mp bad coloration camera
Hey, see if you can help me... I need to do videos footages without zoom, and then on a editor, I want to zoom in some parts... When I do that, I don't have much quality, the images get blur... What should I look into a camera to be able to zoom in on a editor and still get good quality?
so art lens dont make the crispy photo?
I didn't know Jesse Eisenberg had a TH-cam channel.
Dear thiojoe, im really bored of you videos and i ask you to make them more exciting, you sound way too monotone and theres a lack of comedy. That was just my opinion and my critism.
I tried to destroy the 'like' button, but it was still there
its dpi all over again
In a DSLR more pixels is/are better, because you have interchangable lenses and some are more or less efficient than others. Depending on the lens your 20 mp sensor might be giving you only 15 mp. None give you the full 20, btw. So while I don't buy for megapixels, if I can get more, I'll take them.
iPhone still 12mega pixel and still can compete with 40mega pixel other competitors
If size of the Sensor is the real issue then How are smartphones doing it. Is it more of the alogorithm they use and if so does that phase out that the Sensor size matters?
1300d or 1500d which one is best.
Why not just use bigger sensor on phone then? There s plenty of space on the back side?
If i understand this correctly, there is a trade off between mp and the size of the pixes, with bigger pixel making better images because its more light sensitive?
Hey ...I want to buy a DSLR ..should I buy a DSLR with with more megapixels or a DSLR with more lens?
so is there a huge difference between 24 megapixels and 6? i’m deciding between betting a Canon rebel t7 or a Nikon D40x, which one takes better pictures
Hi ...this is very interesting ...I have an old Canon A70 3.2 mp camera in full working camera ....is it worth hanging onto ?
so why dont we just increase the pixel size in smartphones? what's stopping us? is it costly?
so informative, thanks dude, now i know.
Bro what if I have a phone which has 13 mp and a dslr which has 10 mp? What would be better?
wtf i am so early
You're never too early ;)... Ho, Ho, Ho
+Joe A. that not what my girlfriend says
+The Pap LMAO
+ThioJoeTech If you comment on this I will litterly order 10 pizzas to your'e house
You'll deliver a litter of pizza?
He will litter an order of pizza at his house
yep
You sound more confused than myself..don't try teaching.
Are more megapixels better? Yes, yes, yes. And no, no, no. But generally yes.
You should always look for a camera that is a right fit for you. You should make sure that the picture quality and the right megapixels are the ones that you will use. There is no need to buy a camera that will only be used to get the job done.
Difference between Modem and Router !
Thank you so much!!!! I am actually looking to upgrade from a mirrorless camera entry level to a DSLR. My goal is to photograph flowers and landscaping. Which one would you recommend Nikon D810 or Nikon D850?
Can you make a video explaining how to exculsively explain certain explanations expressly excteiptionally?
For videos is better low mp?
So if you want to use your phone for pictures, do it during the day and keep the iso low or auto
It would be helpful to not only explain the difference but show the steps what it would look like comparing devices on a site and discerning the tech specs which relate to your vid.
So.. Should I buy Nikon P900, or Nikon D3400 for macro photos ? xd
is it really sensor size? assuming same lens size, the amount of light captured will be the same for a camera with small sensor and camera with large sensor. there are more lens that do the work of focussing the light onto the sensor so even for small pixels, the light is just more concentrated. so isnt it the lens size that matters? how much light is let into the camera in the first place?
image quality ok let's compare your cell phone camera to my Hasselblad 50 mp or my exact back with a max 192 mp.
Thank you for this!!!! I subbed
What are the diff. Between 12MP fullframe vs 24MP crop in output?
I did this, and it worked! Furthermore, I'm a broke boy from all the buying megapixels I went with. So many pixels, so few dollars.
I want to count how many pixel you say but i'm tired hehehe
third
thio hates you
So what would the camera on a Lumia 950 compare to, quality wise, for a dslr. Or say the 1020 w/ a 41MP resolution?
What about Lense Quality? Huawei used Leica Lenses What does Apple use?
so in that case, in between a canon T100 and a T3 wich one is a better option?
Hey Joe, just got here in this channel, I don't know if you already made a video about, but I wonder, if Intel was about to release a new processor, how do you think it would be? Thank you
Great, that explains why my 5mp Sony takes a lot better pictures than my 18mp Canon. The 18mp is a joke because in three years I have never been able to get a picture over 3mp from it.
+Gene Rodgers r those dslrs or camera phones or compacts cameras?
Great Explanation .