A few years ago camera
manufacturers created the impression that a higher resolution (more pixels)
sensors would automatically result in better photographs. That, however, ignored other important
aspects of a high quality digital file, like noise, ISO range, dynamic range, exposure
latitude, color accuracy and more.
It became obvious that a
higher pixel count would inevitably need to be paid for with a whole lot of
shortcomings and the pixel race definitely slowed down. Most manufacturers settled on a full frame
resolution of about 25 megapixels.
But lately a higher pixel
count again garners interest. Some newly
introduced full frame digital cameras herald resolution of 50 and even 60 megapixels
and just this morning there are reports that Canon might introduce a full frame
camera with a sensor of 80 megapixels.
Obviously it cannot be
argued that a higher resolution sensor will result in sharper images, as long
as there are no other, image degrading side effects and as long as the lens on
the camera is capable of dealing with that high a resolution. With other words, if a lens is only sharp
enough to adequately deal with 25 megapixels, then all else is a waste.
But what is possibly
gained by a higher resolution sensor?
The main advantage lies in the fact that it allows for bigger
enlargements or more severe cropping, both without loss of detail in the resulting
image.
Full frame
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M8 (10.3 megapixel), 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit
Special applications not withstanding, how big an enlargement or how much cropping capabilities do we
really need? This is a question everyone
has to answer for him/herself.
So what are different
camera sensors actually have to offer in this respect? Just some simple math offers considerable
insight here.
It is generally accepted
that with perfect vision, the human eye can resolve 10 lpm (lines per millimeter). However, that is under ideal conditions and a
figure of 7 lpm is the generally accepted more realistic figure.
The sensor in the Leica
M10 has a resolution of 5952 x 3992 pixels while new Leica Q2 resolution is
8369 x 5584. That means, without any
other resolution deteriorating factors, the M10 can render enlargements of 80 x 57 cm (31.5 x 22.5 inch) based in the
more realistic resolution of 7 lpm for the human eye. With the Q2 that increases to 119 x 81 cm (47
x 32 inch). Those are impressive figures
and they bring up the question of how much more do we need.
Full frame
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M8, 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit
Full frame
Cropped section of the above image
Even a relatively low resolution of 5 megapixel can render quite acceptable results
Leica Digilux 2
The biggest enlargement I
have hanging in my house is 28 x 22 inch.
That is quite an exception. The
limiting factor for me is available wall space.
After all, why make an enlargement if it is not displayed? The capabilities of the Leica M10 would have
been capable of making that enlargement, as a matter of fact; another aspect of
this discussion must be viewing distance.
Even the more realistic
figure of 7 lpm is based on a viewing distance of approximately 12 inches. While that is realistic for small prints, like
the common 8 x10 inch enlargement, that is unrealistic for much larger
prints. There we usually view a picture
from a greater distance which further reduces the resolution requirements. With other words, an even bigger enlargement
would look perfectly sharp, even is the resolution was less than 7 lpm.
Of course cropping
requires greater care if the resulting enlargements are of a more reasonable
size. These are viewed at a closer
viewing distance and thus would reveal any shortcomings in resolution a lot sooner.
Full frame of raw image file
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M240, 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit
I rarely use image files
straight from the camera. I have found
that most images can be considerably improved by post processing. Subsequently another limiting factor might be
the capabilities of our computer systems.
If it becomes difficult for a computer to handle the much larger files
of a higher resolution camera, and if the higher resolution is rarely, if ever
fully taken advantage of, it becomes further questionable if it is worth to
consider such a camera.
Full frame
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M240, 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit
Full Frame
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M240, 50mm f/2 Summicron
Full frame
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M240, 28mm f/2 Elmarit
Full frame
Cropped section of the above image
Leica M240, 50mm f/2 Summicron
Of course, other individuals’
mileage might vary in this respect, but for me, the 24 megapixel resolution of
my camera has served me quite well and I see little reason to change. On the other hand, the Q2 has some advantages
in terms of cropping. Being that the
camera has a fixed lens, cropping to the field of view of longer lenses can be
done to quite an extend without sacrificing overall quality of the results.
So it appears that the
higher resolution figures that once again are creeping up in this discussion
are primarily used as a carrot on a stick to lead potential camera buyers to
invest in something that, in most cases, is unnecessary.
For other articles on this blog please click on Blog Archive in the column to the right
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
http://www.tamarkinauctions.com/ http://www.tamarkin.com/leicagallery/upcoming-show
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
http://www.tamarkinauctions.com/ http://www.tamarkin.com/leicagallery/upcoming-show
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
But you said yourself that an image from a higher megapixel sensor is sharper.
ReplyDeleteYes it is. But in smaller, more reasonably sized images some of the extra detail that a higher resolving sensor is capable of recording,this extra detail cannot be seen (resolved) by the human eye. As such, the image does not look any different than the same image from a lower resolution sensor.
Delete