Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

New DX !!!!

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

kodachrome
19 Nov 2012 - 9:13 AM

I can remember a Nikon spokesman a few years ago saying he thought 12-15 MP is about where they should stop and other aspects of picture quality should be developed, such as the processor, or words to that effect. Olympus said a similar thing about their 10 and 12mp cameras.
Don't times change, but has it been for the better.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
19 Nov 2012 - 9:13 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

thewilliam
19 Nov 2012 - 10:53 AM


Quote: I can remember a Nikon spokesman a few years ago saying he thought 12-15 MP is about where they should stop and other aspects of picture quality should be developed, such as the processor, or words to that effect. Olympus said a similar thing about their 10 and 12mp cameras.
Don't times change, but has it been for the better.

The folk at Nikon told me the same thing. Unfortunately, most punters just look at the pixel count and believe that it's the only thing that determines image quality.

Jestertheclown
19 Nov 2012 - 11:05 AM

There's forum thread running on DPReviews site re. these 24mp. sensors.

The general feeling there seems to be that they're really not that special; in fact, they can be more trouble than they're worth and unless you have a specific requirement for one, you'd be better off sticking with something that uses one of Nikon's (I know that they don't necessarily make them) 14 - 16 mp. jobs.

For the time being anyway.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62489 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
19 Nov 2012 - 2:19 PM


Quote: There's forum thread running on DPReviews site re. these 24mp. sensors.

(snipped) you'd be better off sticking with something that uses one of Nikon's (I know that they don't necessarily make them) 14 - 16 mp. jobs.


There are threads on dpreview that bear little resemblance to reality Sad
Talking FX, BJP (probably the UK's most respected Pro mag) rates the D600 as better than the D3x for resolution (just), colour balance and high ISO noise at one third of the D3x price.
DX is generally similar though not quite so good at high ISO noise.
Horses for courses - I am not having any issues with 36 MP for making big prints.
I am not saying 24 MP is essential for photographic work, but generally current generation (what the OP refers to) when it becomes available is better than older digital.

Jestertheclown
19 Nov 2012 - 3:09 PM


Quote: There are threads on dpreview that bear little resemblance to reality Sad


. . . a lot like here then!

thewilliam
19 Nov 2012 - 3:33 PM

We quickly get used to whatever we have and only really appreciate the progress in digital technology when we need to revisit an old image.

One client has just asked for pix from a session that I did 6 years back. We're spoiled!

kodachrome
19 Nov 2012 - 4:44 PM

I dug my old D5000 out recently and fired it up with the 18-105. I believe the Same 12mp sensor as the D300/90 etc. I was quite amazed at the dynamic range and very low noise this number of pixels gives. Some of the posts on the DP Forum are written by morons.
I also have the D5100 and its really no better in certain aspects than the D5000. They both give stunning IQ.

Jestertheclown
19 Nov 2012 - 5:07 PM


Quote: Some of the posts on the DP Forum are written by morons.

Why do you say that?
They're forum posts, the same as any other forum. Just because you disagree, that doesn't make anyone a moron.

kodachrome
19 Nov 2012 - 7:21 PM

Its not that I disagree, its some of the posts are so badly written that its hard to understand just what is being said. Perhaps moron is the wrong word.

User_Removed
19 Nov 2012 - 8:42 PM


Quote: Its not that I disagree, its some of the posts are so badly written that its hard to understand just what is being said. Perhaps moron is the wrong word.

You have got to watch that line of thought, kodachrome. A not insignificant number of posts on this forum are severely lacking in terms of spelling, grammar and syntax and some do have difficulty in expressing what the writer may have been trying to convey. But lacking a formal education does not make someone a bad photographer or devalue their contribution to a debate on the subject.

annettep38
annettep38 e2 Member 3187 forum postsannettep38 vcard France32 Constructive Critique Points
21 Nov 2012 - 10:57 AM

I can see that for some subjects like birds or specialized macro a big sensor is not necessarily an advantage. So if you do nothing but that, 25 MP on a small sensor that gives you 900mm instead of 600 can be interesting, yes!
Or 1:1 on an APS sensor on a tiny insect at 25 MP, yes, I can see the point. Not that I really need it.
But then, I think the 25 MP of my D3x ( which I have already dropped 3 times trying to get a tricky shot, on slippery pavement in town and on a bad bump in the road with my Land Rover) are more than sufficient and I find myself rapidly running out of computing power and HD space. My medium format scans at about 36 MP took more space but there were less of them.
All in all, I happily live with a bit more noise and an image quality that makes me perfectly happy. And most of all a sturdy build quality which I somehow can't see in a d600.

______
as to kodachrome... I have been attacked in a French forum as a moron because I had misspelled a word. English is my second language and I have been a foreigner for the past 33 years of my life in different countries. I value EPZ for its tolerance towards people of very different origins and cultural backgrounds. I'm glad this is about light and catching it with lenses on sensors or films and not grammar, religion or politics.

kodachrome
21 Nov 2012 - 4:41 PM

Its not misspelling or poor grammar, its some of the 'slang' words and abbreviations I just didn't understand, especially when some forum posts [not on this forum] are written in Text short hand.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139498 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
21 Nov 2012 - 7:42 PM


Quote: its some of the 'slang' words and abbreviations I just didn't understand, especially when some forum posts [not on this forum] are written in Text short hand.

ROTFL ! Wink

Jestertheclown
21 Nov 2012 - 9:19 PM


Quote: ROTFL !

. . . I don't understand?

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139498 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
21 Nov 2012 - 9:46 PM


Quote: . . . I don't understand?

LOL ! Grin

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.