how many mega pixels is enough

Phal said:
I like at least 12 pixels! Not megapixels... Just pixels
Click to expand...

I would say 2, that is enough to detect an edge!

Serious answer, is it depends. It depends in lots of actors: how big do you want print, how close will you be to that print, how much do you want to crop, how good is your vision, what are you photographing, what sensor size does the camera have, how good is the lens?

Some pointers:
A) HD TV is only 2MP final output, 4K is about 8MP.
B) however, the above is full RGB pixels, a stills camera only records a single channel per a pixel and interpolates across. Therefore, a real equivalence to 4K would be 24MP
C) for prints of high quality you want to print at 300DPI
D) when you print really big then you end up viewing from further away so you don't need such print density.
E) not all MP are equal. 12MP from a Full frame DSLR camera will beat 12MP from a crop DSLR, which will beat 12Mp from a m43 camera, which will beat 12MP from a compact, which will beat 12MP from a phone.
F) over sampling and reducing in post will increase quality, e.g. If you want a great 12MP image then shooting at 24 or better still 36MP and downsampling will give better results.
G) higher mega pixels will let you crop in post which has advantages, but proper framing will give better results.
 
For most people 4-6 mp is more then enough. Anyone who is into bit of photography would need at least 8-16 mp. For pro's and hobbyist 16+ mp.
 
All depends on what year it is.

I remember people saying 10mp was more than enough, then 16, then 24.

36 is the max on a DSLR at the moment I think (D810), but Nikons latest 4 "pro" FX cameras (as determined by their website, not me) currently cover, 16 (D4s & Df), 24 (D750) and 36 (D810).

Each will have specific uses though and features to match. The D4s is "only" 16, but is used by sports photographers the world over because it can take a ton of pin sharp images a second, the D810 has a higher resolution and so can't take as many a second (file sizes are much bigger), but is mostly aimed at people doing landscape type work where they a) want huge ass prints b) want tons of minute detail c) mountains don't move much.

Megapixels in themselves mean sod all though.
 
Gimme more… ..

Seriously though I used to think that 10-12mp was enough but since I bought my 1st 24mp SLR the ability to crop has become such a useful tool to me that I'm not sure I'd want to be without it now.
 
Obviously since reading this I realised that sharpness and iso play a major part. Would I be correct in assuming that this would take precedent taking in to consideration that I will be using two Fujis that don't go above 16mp?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom