so 5 megapixel is enough.......

RonHendriks1966 · 03-23-2015, 11:21 AM - **1 Like**

If we make a photobook large size square, 30x30cm, that is almost 12x12 inch one only needs 5 megapixels for good quality. Yes it gets a little better at 8 megapixel and even just another notch better at 12 megapixel, but I doubt you will see this on a regular base.

So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea?

stillshot2 · 03-23-2015, 11:28 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea?

So they can shoot wildlife with an FA 50mm 1.7 and crop, which means no lens changes necessary!

Silverstierna · 03-23-2015, 11:28 AM - **1 Like**

Probably the same reason as why my car has more than 50bhp and an engine larger than 1.0L

Dartmoor Dave · 03-23-2015, 11:32 AM

There are plenty of people still getting great results from the 6 megapixel K100D: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/234878-appreciate-k100d.html

**boriscleto** · 03-23-2015, 11:32 AM - **6 Likes**

Because this one goes to 11...

You Tube

Pavel_Zhelev · 03-23-2015, 11:35 AM

The megapixel race is nothing but a push for the consumer to buy a new "better" performing product. Camera manufactorers need to make money too

(apparently even with this kind of a marketing push they are not very successful) . I agree that 5 Mpx for most of the consumers is plenty to play with.

JinDesu · 03-23-2015, 11:53 AM

Maybe someone wants to print at 120"x120".

JimC1101 · 03-23-2015, 12:08 PM

Well, to me, it is all about cropping. I love the Sony sweet 16 and to me it is enough. 5MP is too small for good crops but 50MP in my mind would be overkill. I am sure others would disagree.

biz-engineer · 03-23-2015, 12:22 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea?

Very good question: the benefit of a 50Mp sensor is that an optical AA is not needed anymore, and since AA filter are sort of 1st order filters, to be efficient against aliasing, the AA filter also degrade the contrast of the image at lower spatial frequencies, i.e the quality of lower resolution image is lower. If you'd use a 50Mpixels sensor with a digital down sampling that give you a 24Mpixel RAW file, the image quality would be better than the image quality of the Nikon D600/D610/D750. The downside of a 50Mp sensor is that it may be slightly more expensive due to lower production yield, and the digital low pass filter would also add costs or a bit more processing time.

robthebloke · 03-23-2015, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea?

I recently bought a Lenovo yoga 2 pro, which has a 13.3" display that is just under 4k (about 6mp or so? And that isn't even 4k). That's actually changed my opinions on the subject a little bit. So yeah, 5mp wouldn't be quite enough for me

Pixel peeping is now impossible (the pixels are just too small). So viewing my k5 images at 100% displays about 40% of the image. High ISO noise is far less obvious when viewing at 100% pixel peeping range as well.

If you were to create a 26" monitor with the same technology, you'd be looking at a 24mp display. If you apply moore's law here, we should expect those displays in 3 years time (although monitors have traditionally been a little behind the curve, so let's say 6 years).

From my own experience, on my display, I can tell immediately when I'm viewing a 2mp image scaled to 6mp, or a native 6mp image.

For me personally, 50mp is overkill. 24 mp should future proof your images for consumption on the highest specced pcs for the next 6 years at least. 50mp just adds cropping ability into the mix

For prints though, it may not make sense.

ChristianRock · 03-23-2015, 12:28 PM

I have a poster size print of my wife at the beach when she was pregnant with our 2nd son. It was taken with what I had back then, in 2010 - my Sony 7.2MP point and shoot. You can look very closely and look at all the details in the sand, and also the details in the dress she was wearing. Of course that was uncropped and in good light, but still.

biz-engineer · 03-23-2015, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by robthebloke

Lenovo yoga 2 pro

Is this kind of a retina display?

robthebloke · 03-23-2015, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Is this kind of a retina display?

It's a 3200x1800 IPS display in a very thin laptop. Side note: for me it does everything I need. A small thing I can program on during my commute (although my commute has now become my Lightroom time...)

Lenovo IdeaPad Yoga 2 Pro review: a high-end Ultrabook that's actually affordable

LensBeginner · 03-23-2015, 01:02 PM

Cropping.
Plus, I'd like to make a wall-sized print, one day...
Not that I'd like a 50MP camera, ATM.
16-36 (APS-C, FF) would be just about right at present, IMHO.

**boriscleto** · 03-23-2015, 01:15 PM - **2 Likes**

I regularly crop down to 5MP or less. Only having 5MP to start with is unthinkable for most of what I do...

03-23-2015, 11:21 AM - 1 Like	#1
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	so 5 megapixel is enough....... If we make a photobook large size square, 30x30cm, that is almost 12x12 inch one only needs 5 megapixels for good quality. Yes it gets a little better at 8 megapixel and even just another notch better at 12 megapixel, but I doubt you will see this on a regular base. So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
So is 16 megapixel enough?	RonHendriks1966	Pentax DSLR Discussion	307	11-20-2014 10:52 AM
Why is the K-5 IIs video mode so bad?	ZombieArmy	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	37	07-10-2014 09:08 AM
Is the image processor in Pentax K-r is good enough?	dmnf	Photographic Technique	10	05-15-2013 09:43 AM
[Auto-ISO] so, is the K5 and Kr brave enough to use max iso?	Reportage	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	13	10-24-2010 03:30 PM

03-23-2015, 11:28 AM - 2 Likes	#2
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea? So they can shoot wildlife with an FA 50mm 1.7 and crop, which means no lens changes necessary!

03-23-2015, 11:28 AM - 1 Like	#3
Silverstierna Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Canada, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 60	Probably the same reason as why my car has more than 50bhp and an engine larger than 1.0L

03-23-2015, 11:32 AM	#4
Dartmoor Dave Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Dartmoor, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,882	There are plenty of people still getting great results from the 6 megapixel K100D: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/234878-appreciate-k100d.html

03-23-2015, 11:35 AM	#6
Pavel_Zhelev Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 191	The megapixel race is nothing but a push for the consumer to buy a new "better" performing product. Camera manufactorers need to make money too (apparently even with this kind of a marketing push they are not very successful) . I agree that 5 Mpx for most of the consumers is plenty to play with.

03-23-2015, 11:53 AM	#7
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Maybe someone wants to print at 120"x120".

03-23-2015, 12:08 PM	#8
JimC1101 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Fremont, Ca Photos: Albums Posts: 395	Well, to me, it is all about cropping. I love the Sony sweet 16 and to me it is enough. 5MP is too small for good crops but 50MP in my mind would be overkill. I am sure others would disagree.

03-23-2015, 12:22 PM - 1 Like	#9
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea? Very good question: the benefit of a 50Mp sensor is that an optical AA is not needed anymore, and since AA filter are sort of 1st order filters, to be efficient against aliasing, the AA filter also degrade the contrast of the image at lower spatial frequencies, i.e the quality of lower resolution image is lower. If you'd use a 50Mpixels sensor with a digital down sampling that give you a 24Mpixel RAW file, the image quality would be better than the image quality of the Nikon D600/D610/D750. The downside of a 50Mp sensor is that it may be slightly more expensive due to lower production yield, and the digital low pass filter would also add costs or a bit more processing time.

03-23-2015, 12:26 PM	#10
robthebloke Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 844	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 So why do some people think that 50 megapixels for the next FF camera is a great idea? I recently bought a Lenovo yoga 2 pro, which has a 13.3" display that is just under 4k (about 6mp or so? And that isn't even 4k). That's actually changed my opinions on the subject a little bit. So yeah, 5mp wouldn't be quite enough for me Pixel peeping is now impossible (the pixels are just too small). So viewing my k5 images at 100% displays about 40% of the image. High ISO noise is far less obvious when viewing at 100% pixel peeping range as well. If you were to create a 26" monitor with the same technology, you'd be looking at a 24mp display. If you apply moore's law here, we should expect those displays in 3 years time (although monitors have traditionally been a little behind the curve, so let's say 6 years). From my own experience, on my display, I can tell immediately when I'm viewing a 2mp image scaled to 6mp, or a native 6mp image. For me personally, 50mp is overkill. 24 mp should future proof your images for consumption on the highest specced pcs for the next 6 years at least. 50mp just adds cropping ability into the mix For prints though, it may not make sense.

03-23-2015, 12:28 PM	#11
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,910	I have a poster size print of my wife at the beach when she was pregnant with our 2nd son. It was taken with what I had back then, in 2010 - my Sony 7.2MP point and shoot. You can look very closely and look at all the details in the sand, and also the details in the dress she was wearing. Of course that was uncropped and in good light, but still.

03-23-2015, 12:31 PM	#12
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	Originally posted by robthebloke Lenovo yoga 2 pro Is this kind of a retina display?

03-23-2015, 12:41 PM	#13
robthebloke Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 844	Originally posted by biz-engineer Is this kind of a retina display? It's a 3200x1800 IPS display in a very thin laptop. Side note: for me it does everything I need. A small thing I can program on during my commute (although my commute has now become my Lightroom time...) Lenovo IdeaPad Yoga 2 Pro review: a high-end Ultrabook that's actually affordable

03-23-2015, 01:02 PM	#14
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Cropping. Plus, I'd like to make a wall-sized print, one day... Not that I'd like a 50MP camera, ATM. 16-36 (APS-C, FF) would be just about right at present, IMHO.

03-23-2015, 01:15 PM - 2 Likes	#15
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	I regularly crop down to 5MP or less. Only having 5MP to start with is unthinkable for most of what I do...