Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
In one sense there is no such thing as too much.
Off topic (the OP asked about digital compacts) in this weeks AP the D800 and 800e are equaling the Hasselblad HD 31 at 100 ISO and beating it for noise and dynamic range at 1600 ISO. This sort of performance from 35mm format would have been laughed at 2 years ago - but digital development moves fast - and it is here 
I doubt if you can buy a 6 MP new digital compact now, and there are no longer any 6 MP DSLR's in production - so in this sense you have to buy at least the minimum MP in production.
Noise is generally better than thought possible 2 years ago - so simplify the issue - just choose from what is available - and accept more MP together with improved noise will likely be around next year.
Quote: Leftheforum think your being contradictive there . If the D3s as you said gave you more than enough even printing on a3 + media . Then why go out and buy a D800 ? . .
I think I answered that in my post.
It has absolutely nothing to do with "needs". It has all to do with having fun with photography and technology. That is the huge difference between we amateurs and the few professionals who use similar equipment. As amateurs we have the huge advantage of being able to concentrate upon having fun with our hobby while professionals have to worry about cost-effectiveness and clients.
Two entirely diferent worlds. I'd really hate to be a professional and have to worry about all the ***** that would take the fun out of photography.
.
Quote: For some sensational reason were now stuck with the excuse of being able to crop tighter as a single reason for having more pixels, Surely if thats the case then whats the point in going for 36 million pixels only to crop it to one third that to get closer .
It depends what you mean by "excuses" 
Discussing the D800 is part off topic as the original question was about MP in compacts.
Some of us want 36 MP to print better quality A2 size prints, or to get more and better tonal separation in a print. The more MP there are the better the tonal separation can be.
On noise lets not forget Canon did not get it decent (as distinct from good) at 400 ISO until their second generation 24x36 body. Most decent compacts are now at least as good at 400 ISO.
While the average compact owner is unlikely to be interested in A2 prints, several compacts are capable of pro results ahead of what a D100 could deliver in it's era. If you include the Olympus OM-D system in the "compact" category - then it seems quite a bit better than a D100.
Back to cropping - surely it is more a case of cropping if you have to? What happens if you do not have a 600 with you, or you encounter a shot that needs 1200mm? Wildlife photographers in particular know they can get good A3 from heavily cropped 36 MP.
This weeks Amateur Photographer clarifies the D800 matches 31MP medium format Hasselblad - at less than 33% of the body price.
Compact digital cannot fully match current DSLR's - but they certainly can give 3-4 year old DSLR technology a good run for it's money.
Whether an individual photographer buys the current "greatest and dearest" or last years greatest and dearest second hand is personal choice. That aside the nature of photography is that more or better features will be put to good use by some photographers
Quote: If the one thing that is limiting the use of having to crop is the focal length of the lens then simply invest in a longer lens and keep the pixel count surely doesnt that make more sense it does to me.
Long lenses are very,very expensive and very heavy - I know as I carry them around. If you can get a sensor that allows you to crop a shorter lens (or use the higher MP sensor in various aspect ratios) while giving the same resolution then this seems very sensible. It works out cheaper than buying long lenses.
The main downside is that higher pixel density leads to more noise at very high ISOs but this problem is diminishing with every generation of sensor. In the case of APS-C/FF cameras the higher MP cameras can usually match the lower MP cameras on noise, provided that the image is downsampled appropriately. So you get the choice of better resolution or low noise levels.
In the case of compact cameras, where you don't normally shoot in RAW, I'd go for the lowest Mp on offer - probably about 10Mp.
Quote: Compact digital cannot fully match current DSLR's
I would take a look at the comparisons on pages 4 and 5 of this thread before being too sure about that.
And even if you don't agree with the comparisons, well some pros are making a living using CSCs.
Well here's three that I think would give most Dslr,s a run for thier money.
CANON G12
NIKON P7100
PANASONIC LUMIX LX5
Quote: In one sense there is no such thing as too much.
Off topic (the OP asked about digital compacts) in this weeks AP the D800 and 800e are equaling the Hasselblad HD 31 at 100 ISO and beating it for noise and dynamic range at 1600 ISO. This sort of performance from 35mm format would have been laughed at 2 years ago - but digital development moves fast - and it is here
I doubt if you can buy a 6 MP new digital compact now, and there are no longer any 6 MP DSLR's in production - so in this sense you have to buy at least the minimum MP in production.
Noise is generally better than thought possible 2 years ago - so simplify the issue - just choose from what is available - and accept more MP together with improved noise will likely be around next year.
The D800 is an impressive camera - possibly the most impressive of the recent Pro releases.
As for it matching medium format at base ISOs the video here suggests it can for resolution, but not for the range of subtle gradation particularly in shadow detail.
It does of course roundly thrash it at higher ISO sensitivities - none of the medium format manufacturers seem either able or concerned with making their sensors perform when boosted.
But as for the performance being 'laughed at' 2 years ago, I'm not sure that's the case. If you compare the D800 against the D7000 [granted, we're only talking about 18 months ago], the pixel density is similar and the high ISO performance broadly in line.
Comparing other recent releases and the picture looks even less rosy in terms of IQ advance. Look at the 5DII vs 5DIII. There's virtually no resolution difference at all. Canon claim a 2 stop advantage at higher ISOs in JPEG, but I'd say it looks more like 1.5. Look at the RAW files and it's less than a stop - what leap forward has been made in IQ terms in well over three years here? The maximum sensitivity setting of the 5DIII just shouldn't be there - the results are awful and they're not much cop at ISO 51,200 either [see the current ephotozine review].
The D3s vs D4 does admittedly give a more significant pixel count advantage, but once again the top setting is, if anything, even more laughable that the 5DIII's maximum. At the same setting as the D3s' high, the older camera looks like it is resolving more detail, even if you were to downsample image size.
The D800's resolution performance is also negated after between f11-f16 - heaven alone knows where the D3200's performance tails off with a cheap kit lens...
So it seems that in all sorts of areas, pixel gain is a trade off against higher sensitivity performance [which is making very modest gains if any] and hampered by the resolving power of lenses at smaller apertures.
It may well be that there are gains to be made by having higher sensel counts where that resolution is used to mitigate other factors by pixel binning - but everything points to the fact that the era of massive gains in resolution and sensitivity are over as the current model for camera manufacture has reached a technological maturity.
It may very well be that you could get up to 60m sensels on a 36x24mm sensor and record that amount of detail - but at the cost of permanently shooting 'wide-open'? There comes a point where the compromise shows little benefit.
Either the entire paradigm alters or the D800 is unlikely to be bettered significantly in terms of IQ in the forseeable future.
Some of you may find Steve Huff's article 'The Pixel Myth' quite enlightening.
Kodachrome
Quote: Maybe he withdrew it... on finding it wasn't a myth after all! Lol!
I can remember visiting the Cave of Psychro [Lasithi Plateau, Crete] which we were assured by the guide was the true birthplace of mythical king of the Gods, Zeus - and that we shouldn't be taken in by other guides of other caves claiming there's was the real site of the nativity of the legendary deity.
I don't know why the internet reminds me of that sometimes...
Guys
My applogies, I miss informed you. It should have read 'The Megapixel Myth' by Ken Rockwell.
Kodachrome.
Yes Ken Rockwell here is another of his articles He is in a good place to draw a balanced conclusion, not.
Though that article you mention is one of his more balanced articles. Still as Ken says
Quote: I have a big sense of humor, and do this site to entertain you (and myself), as well as to inform and to educate. I occasionally weave fiction and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. I love a good hoax. Read The Museum of Hoaxes, or see their site. A hoax, like some of the things I do on this website, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds as a practical joke. Even Ansel Adams kidded around when he was just a pup in the 1920s by selling his photos as "Parmelian Prints." I have the energy and sense of humor of a three-year old, so remember, this is a personal website, and never presented as fact. I enjoy making things up for fun, as does The Onion, and I publish them here — even on this page.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Olympus 'Portraiture' Competition - Win £1000 Worth Of Gear!
30th April 2013 - 31st May 2013
This month, to celebrate the launch of Olympus' new micro site Olympus Image Space, Olympus are giving you the chance to win £1000 worth of Olympus gear!...
Featured e2 Photo
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
