Originally posted by Rondec I think the biggest issues aren't the lenses (although low quality lenses will invariably suffer with higher pixel density), it is all the other things that effect image sharpness -- camera shake, subject movement, use of higher isos, and focus being off. From what I have seen at low iso, in perfect situations, there is some gain going from 16 megapixel to 24 megapixel senors (APS-C), but it certainly isn't huge and as you bump iso or introduce any of the other possible softening effects, this benefit goes away.
Very much agree.
Coming from using the Q with a K-Q adapter, which basically packs MP into a small area of the lens, the main thing that struck me was not whether my K-mounts were good enough, but focus error/ camera shake and subject movement.
The good lenses have so far been very sharp (that means center sharp, since the Q uses only that).
Apparently so too with test shots in the house of well lit and fixed items.
But when I start using these lenses in actual applications hand held, hot/less comfortable outdoors, moving subjects, the MP density shows off all errors mentioned above.
But lets see what the 24MP sensor can give from a Pentax.
Originally posted by philbaum
Pentax will likely come out with a 24mp K5 successor this year, imo. I still really like my K5 and will keep it indefinitely. If anything, i'm in the market for a compact camera. I think we're in a "golden age" of dslr cameras where they are all pretty capable - and what matters is the artist behind the tool.
Very true.
Circa 2011-12, most cameras have sensors that are actually good enough for most uses, especially so when coupled with a nice fast lens.