Ken,
I understand what you're saying. One can easily crop to 5 MP from a 16MP
sensor if needed ;).
But I know I'm a rather lazy person. I found the 22 MP from the 5Dii
already (too) much.
I've a picture here (cityscape) with the 90 Macro where simply everything
resolves right under your nose
(5cm from the paper) on a 1.20 x1.80m print. I could double it in size and
at 30cm distance
it would still be of very high quality. No: resolution there is plenty now.
I don't have the cash
to print decently at these sizes!
This is becoming an old song, but please: let those developers work at more
dynamic range, lower ISO,
not more MP.
Iwert
2014-01-28 Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > I could print rather nicely up to A1 size @ 12MP.
> > 16MP up to A0.
>
> Nonesense. For anything larger than A3 you need at least 36MP. ;)
>
And some good glasses ;)
>
>
> > 16 or 18? I don't see the difference, I like 4/3, so 18 on 2/3 is about
> the
> > same as 16 on 4/3...
>
> LOL, you caught me. I was wondering if anybody would. Yes, 18MP on 2/3
> is what I'm referring to directly. However, there is the numbers game
> and just as 5MP in the E-1 was the same as 6MP (actually more) in
> APS-C, the pre-crop to more squarish format of 4/3 puts it behind the
> psychological 8 ball. This is even more true now than ever before
> because the old-school standard crops of 4x5 ratio have been going
> away in favor of more long and narrow formats. Width is more important
> now than before. For the typical home-town professional one-lung
> photographer, the more squarish format of 4x5 is still easier to work
> with and the requirements for anything more than 5MP are pretty much
> nil anyway.
>
> I personally consider 16MP the bare minimum for 4/3 format now. (new
> camera purchase). Granted, that's our only choice. But that's also the
> problem in that it is our only choice. In APS-C we've got everything
> from 16MP to 24MP out there. Sony's 24MP sensor has some issues with
> very short and wide lenses (Leica wide angle lenses), but certainly
> does better with lenses with a reverse telephoto design, such as the
> OM Zuiko wides.
>
>
> > I don't need more pixels. I crop at the moment of capture, not in PP.
>
> I've been reforming myself of this. As I'm so used to 35mm film and
> the old E-1/DMC-L1, I too tend to crop at capture, but that's a
> function of necessity, not necessarily desire. I'm getting better
> results (and more photo sales) from stuff that is looser at capture
> and gives room for different cropping for display.
>
>
> --
> Ken Norton
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|