K20d. Too high resolution?

losecontrol · 01-19-2009, 01:31 AM

Hey!

I have read a lot about the pentax k20d lately and compared it much to nikon D300 and canon 40-50d, sony a700 and olympus E3.

In one time comparing with the nikon D300, We was look how fine details the camera could shown. 14,6 vs 12mp

The result is around: 2550 &2600 for the pentax and 2550&2600 for the nikon D300. The same!!

I have also read in a magazine, and they got the same result.

The explination why 14,6 comparing to 12 mp give the same result is much about
the lenses.

So do we have any pentax lenses that can match the high resolution that
pentax k20d have? or do we have to accept that the 2,6 mp more that pentax have just is a waiste and only fills your memorycard and ur computer-memory, and give us more noise?

The fact that 14,6 mp resolution is just too high?

The canon 50d had the same critics that mean that you need monster lenses to use all the megapixels, witch cost you a LOT but gives you very little theoretic-differens in the end (could barely be seen in A3+

)

This is intressting and should be intressest more people.
The Megapixel-race have to stop...

Now people speak about that 15 mp is the maximum resolution for a APS-C sensor, becasue after that the pixels don't give you anything else then trouble.

People that speak about 18mp cameras on APS-C sensor should look elsewhere for an FF sensor, becasuse the pixel race will only get us (buyers) great losses in the end.

What do you guys and girls think about this?
It's intressting to hear opinions!

take part

Regards

Emil

creampuff · 01-19-2009, 02:01 AM

I'd suggest you stop reading and go out and do something really productive like shooting pictures with a Pentax camera.
That's what photography is all about - it's taking pictures, not measurebating.

Where I'm at, the phrase is NPNT (No Picture, No Talk).
BTW you do have a Pentax camera don't you?

losecontrol · 01-19-2009, 02:18 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

I'd suggest you stop reading and go out and do something really productive like shooting pictures with a Pentax camera.
That's what photography is all about - it's taking pictures, not measurebating.

Where I'm at, the phrase is NPNT (No Picture, No Talk).
BTW you do have a Pentax camera don't you?

Hey! Listen up.
I entered in this forum with just that filosofi that you explain now, and Im not
a camera-freak. The opposite. I shot film and use darkroom, and I don't care about
expensive gear ect ect.

But I found it intressting that companies (everyone) think that they can sell gear
to us just use the megapixel-myth. Todays megapixel-race gonna stop, and
inform about such a thing does not prove anything that I mind about the gear.
I mind about that young photographers don't waise their money beliving that
megapixel is the important and not the basic-knowledge of photo.

I want people to start discuss this becasue I want people to see that
megapixel race only fill the companies pockets (when we need invest in expensive
top optic) and we don't win nothing more that just a minor differens on a A2 print.

I love take photos and that's my passion, so don't say im not, without knowing.

I was told enter in this forum that it is much a forum for gear, so becasue of it
I was post this topic. Rather for having an intressting discution than being critizied.

It's great you love take photos. Me too! Let's keep it that way

Regards

Emil

losecontrol · 01-19-2009, 02:21 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

BTW you do have a Pentax camera don't you?

No i don't. But this topic was about megapixels, not about if I have a pentax camera or not.

I thought everyone was welcome here in this forum. At least other members here was told me so

Gimbal · 01-19-2009, 02:34 AM

No it doesn’t have to stop, if you want to stop you can stop at any time.

losecontrol · 01-19-2009, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by Gimbal

No it doesn’t have to stop, if you want to stop you can stop at any time.

You mean the megapixel-race? Well, the only thing I say is that more then 15MP don't give you anything back. There are no differens almost between nikon D300 and canon 50d. 12 vs 15 MP

It means that more then 15MP just give you a bigger file but not a better image IMO

Regards Emil

Vylen · 01-19-2009, 03:22 AM

what are you talking about when you mean "2550&2600" ?

asdf · 01-19-2009, 03:22 AM

Originally posted by losecontrol

You mean the megapixel-race? Well, the only thing I say is that more then 15MP don't give you anything back. There are no differens almost between nikon D300 and canon 50d. 12 vs 15 MP

It means that more then 15MP just give you a bigger file but not a better image IMO

Regards Emil

If you print 6"x4" photos using a 300dpi dye sublimation printer, you only print 6 x 4 x 300 x 300 = 2 160 000 pixels.

losecontrol · 01-19-2009, 03:39 AM

Originally posted by Vylen

what are you talking about when you mean "2550&2600" ?

Well, it's hard to explain. It's one teqnice shot agains one ISO board and then look very closeup to see how fine details the camera can capture.
The number is a number to explain it.
It's some sorts of image lines...horezontal and vertical

If this don't say you much I can give you any examples. (I don't remember exactly but more or less)

You need like 150 more or less to see any differens in a A3+ print.

Canon 40d= 2100-2200
Sony A900= 3100-3200
Canon 50D= 2600-2600
Canon 5d mark II= 3400-3500
Pentax k20d=2550-2600
Sony A700= 2450-2500

Anyting like this.

higher number=Can show finer details

This was taken by very expensive optiks from the manufactors

The maximum of APS-C seams to be 2600-2650 or similar.

conclusions?

Regards Emil

Vylen · 01-19-2009, 03:43 AM

higher resolutions are generally there for people who want to make big prints... its really as simple as that..

losecontrol · 01-19-2009, 03:53 AM

Originally posted by Vylen

higher resolutions are generally there for people who want to make big prints... its really as simple as that..

Great! that's a great post.

Much people combine it with pixels=quality

and it's only about the prints...good one!

That's why I don't understand why the manufactors fight about do the high-pixel model when people just print A3+

I printed a A3+ photo taken with my 8MP compakt-camera. And it was awsome.

ghelary · 01-19-2009, 04:22 AM

I agree with Creampuff with saying that cameras are made to make photos not to make charts.

I own both Pentax K10D (10Mpx) and Pentax K20D (14Mpx) and I can tell that while ergonomics are nearly the same, the K20D is a superior camera. And the 4Mpx add indeed some value (for me, I crop a lot)

The hudge flow in your reasoning is that no lens is mentionned in your testing. The 18-55 kit lens used usually for testing is not good enough to take all the juice of the Samsung sensor. Take a limited Prime fo that, I own FA31, DA70 and FA50 and all of them give better defined results with the K20D vs the K10D.

Another point that shall be taken in account is anti-aliasing filter, more pixels allow for a comparatively stronger anti-aliasing filter. The prime purpose of this filter is to avoid aliasing by blocking the finest details of the image that touch the sensor. Therefore a higher defined sensor may show the same resolution while the lens is not the limitation because the AA filter is comparatively sronger. The benefit of such a strategy is to show an image with fewer artifacts.

Aliasing is among the worst artifacts that you can get on a digital image, this cannot be corrected by image processing. (Unlike distortion, chromatic aberation, color shift)

Please don't see this this comment as me dissing the Nikon D300, would I have an unlimited budget, I would be Nikon equiped by now. I think Nikon 300 is indeed a very good camera, but so is Pentax K20D. Simply discussing of the shortcomings of pixel race by comparing some random numbers between 2 cameras is not very relevant.

Regards,
Guillaume

falconeye · 01-19-2009, 05:24 AM

Originally posted by losecontrol

So do we have any pentax lenses that can match the high resolution that
pentax k20d have?

Pentax is famous for exactly this!
Pentax has a great series of affordable, ultra-sharp primes (the "Limiteds") which, together with the primes from Zeiss and some other offerings, easily outperform the K20D's 15 MPixel (would still be ok with 30 MPixels even...).

A K20D with a DA 40 Ltd. probably is the most portable landscape camera delivering medium format quality in the field.

Wheatfield · 01-19-2009, 06:20 AM

When I went from the K10 to the K20, I did notice that some of my lenses weren't good enough to take full advantage of the high resolution of the K20D sensor. I'm not overly worried about the numbers game, but I did think it interesting that a razor sharp lens on the K10 was slightly soft on the K20 (I focus bracketed a test to prove it to myself).
As far as lenses that are good enough to take advantage of the K20 sensor, yes, they exist. The better quality prime lenses that Pentax makes are certainly up to the sensor.

blende8 · 01-19-2009, 06:46 AM

Overall I think it is better if the lens is the limiting factor, because if it is the sensor you will get Nyquist artifacts etc.
So far we haven't reached this limit though.
I have tested already some of my lenses on the K20D and all of them resolve better than the sensor (Center, perfectly focussed).

01-19-2009, 01:31 AM	#1
losecontrol Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gnesta, Sweden Posts: 373	K20d. Too high resolution? Hey! I have read a lot about the pentax k20d lately and compared it much to nikon D300 and canon 40-50d, sony a700 and olympus E3. In one time comparing with the nikon D300, We was look how fine details the camera could shown. 14,6 vs 12mp The result is around: 2550 &2600 for the pentax and 2550&2600 for the nikon D300. The same!! I have also read in a magazine, and they got the same result. The explination why 14,6 comparing to 12 mp give the same result is much about the lenses. So do we have any pentax lenses that can match the high resolution that pentax k20d have? or do we have to accept that the 2,6 mp more that pentax have just is a waiste and only fills your memorycard and ur computer-memory, and give us more noise? The fact that 14,6 mp resolution is just too high? The canon 50d had the same critics that mean that you need monster lenses to use all the megapixels, witch cost you a LOT but gives you very little theoretic-differens in the end (could barely be seen in A3+ ) This is intressting and should be intressest more people. The Megapixel-race have to stop... Now people speak about that 15 mp is the maximum resolution for a APS-C sensor, becasue after that the pixels don't give you anything else then trouble. People that speak about 18mp cameras on APS-C sensor should look elsewhere for an FF sensor, becasuse the pixel race will only get us (buyers) great losses in the end. What do you guys and girls think about this? It's intressting to hear opinions! take part Regards Emil

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Getting High Resolution for Large Canvas Art	menessie	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	30	02-26-2013 07:53 AM
Wanting to create high resolution slideshow for emailing	lectrolink	Photographic Technique	9	08-14-2010 02:10 PM
645D: high resolution pictures	Reti13	Pentax Medium Format	13	05-26-2010 04:59 AM
Offering pritnts vs high resolution photos on disc?	creoleart	Photographic Industry and Professionals	28	08-16-2009 06:54 PM
What makes a clear high resolution lens	zoeybird	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-11-2009 09:56 PM

01-19-2009, 02:01 AM	#2
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	I'd suggest you stop reading and go out and do something really productive like shooting pictures with a Pentax camera. That's what photography is all about - it's taking pictures, not measurebating. Where I'm at, the phrase is NPNT (No Picture, No Talk). BTW you do have a Pentax camera don't you?

01-19-2009, 02:18 AM	#3
losecontrol Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gnesta, Sweden Posts: 373 Original Poster	Originally posted by creampuff I'd suggest you stop reading and go out and do something really productive like shooting pictures with a Pentax camera. That's what photography is all about - it's taking pictures, not measurebating. Where I'm at, the phrase is NPNT (No Picture, No Talk). BTW you do have a Pentax camera don't you? Hey! Listen up. I entered in this forum with just that filosofi that you explain now, and Im not a camera-freak. The opposite. I shot film and use darkroom, and I don't care about expensive gear ect ect. But I found it intressting that companies (everyone) think that they can sell gear to us just use the megapixel-myth. Todays megapixel-race gonna stop, and inform about such a thing does not prove anything that I mind about the gear. I mind about that young photographers don't waise their money beliving that megapixel is the important and not the basic-knowledge of photo. I want people to start discuss this becasue I want people to see that megapixel race only fill the companies pockets (when we need invest in expensive top optic) and we don't win nothing more that just a minor differens on a A2 print. I love take photos and that's my passion, so don't say im not, without knowing. I was told enter in this forum that it is much a forum for gear, so becasue of it I was post this topic. Rather for having an intressting discution than being critizied. It's great you love take photos. Me too! Let's keep it that way Regards Emil

01-19-2009, 02:21 AM	#4
losecontrol Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gnesta, Sweden Posts: 373 Original Poster	Originally posted by creampuff BTW you do have a Pentax camera don't you? No i don't. But this topic was about megapixels, not about if I have a pentax camera or not. I thought everyone was welcome here in this forum. At least other members here was told me so

01-19-2009, 02:34 AM	#5
Gimbal Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,106	No it doesn’t have to stop, if you want to stop you can stop at any time.

01-19-2009, 02:47 AM	#6
losecontrol Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gnesta, Sweden Posts: 373 Original Poster	Originally posted by Gimbal No it doesn’t have to stop, if you want to stop you can stop at any time. You mean the megapixel-race? Well, the only thing I say is that more then 15MP don't give you anything back. There are no differens almost between nikon D300 and canon 50d. 12 vs 15 MP It means that more then 15MP just give you a bigger file but not a better image IMO Regards Emil

01-19-2009, 03:22 AM	#7
Vylen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,262	what are you talking about when you mean "2550&2600" ?

01-19-2009, 03:22 AM	#8
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	Originally posted by losecontrol You mean the megapixel-race? Well, the only thing I say is that more then 15MP don't give you anything back. There are no differens almost between nikon D300 and canon 50d. 12 vs 15 MP It means that more then 15MP just give you a bigger file but not a better image IMO Regards Emil If you print 6"x4" photos using a 300dpi dye sublimation printer, you only print 6 x 4 x 300 x 300 = 2 160 000 pixels.

01-19-2009, 03:39 AM	#9
losecontrol Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gnesta, Sweden Posts: 373 Original Poster	Originally posted by Vylen what are you talking about when you mean "2550&2600" ? Well, it's hard to explain. It's one teqnice shot agains one ISO board and then look very closeup to see how fine details the camera can capture. The number is a number to explain it. It's some sorts of image lines...horezontal and vertical If this don't say you much I can give you any examples. (I don't remember exactly but more or less) You need like 150 more or less to see any differens in a A3+ print. Canon 40d= 2100-2200 Sony A900= 3100-3200 Canon 50D= 2600-2600 Canon 5d mark II= 3400-3500 Pentax k20d=2550-2600 Sony A700= 2450-2500 Anyting like this. higher number=Can show finer details This was taken by very expensive optiks from the manufactors The maximum of APS-C seams to be 2600-2650 or similar. conclusions? Regards Emil

01-19-2009, 03:43 AM	#10
Vylen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,262	higher resolutions are generally there for people who want to make big prints... its really as simple as that..

01-19-2009, 03:53 AM	#11
losecontrol Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Gnesta, Sweden Posts: 373 Original Poster	Originally posted by Vylen higher resolutions are generally there for people who want to make big prints... its really as simple as that.. Great! that's a great post. Much people combine it with pixels=quality and it's only about the prints...good one! That's why I don't understand why the manufactors fight about do the high-pixel model when people just print A3+ I printed a A3+ photo taken with my 8MP compakt-camera. And it was awsome.

01-19-2009, 04:22 AM	#12
ghelary Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 613	I agree with Creampuff with saying that cameras are made to make photos not to make charts. I own both Pentax K10D (10Mpx) and Pentax K20D (14Mpx) and I can tell that while ergonomics are nearly the same, the K20D is a superior camera. And the 4Mpx add indeed some value (for me, I crop a lot) The hudge flow in your reasoning is that no lens is mentionned in your testing. The 18-55 kit lens used usually for testing is not good enough to take all the juice of the Samsung sensor. Take a limited Prime fo that, I own FA31, DA70 and FA50 and all of them give better defined results with the K20D vs the K10D. Another point that shall be taken in account is anti-aliasing filter, more pixels allow for a comparatively stronger anti-aliasing filter. The prime purpose of this filter is to avoid aliasing by blocking the finest details of the image that touch the sensor. Therefore a higher defined sensor may show the same resolution while the lens is not the limitation because the AA filter is comparatively sronger. The benefit of such a strategy is to show an image with fewer artifacts. Aliasing is among the worst artifacts that you can get on a digital image, this cannot be corrected by image processing. (Unlike distortion, chromatic aberation, color shift) Please don't see this this comment as me dissing the Nikon D300, would I have an unlimited budget, I would be Nikon equiped by now. I think Nikon 300 is indeed a very good camera, but so is Pentax K20D. Simply discussing of the shortcomings of pixel race by comparing some random numbers between 2 cameras is not very relevant. Regards, Guillaume

01-19-2009, 05:24 AM	#13
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by losecontrol So do we have any pentax lenses that can match the high resolution that pentax k20d have? Pentax is famous for exactly this! Pentax has a great series of affordable, ultra-sharp primes (the "Limiteds") which, together with the primes from Zeiss and some other offerings, easily outperform the K20D's 15 MPixel (would still be ok with 30 MPixels even...). A K20D with a DA 40 Ltd. probably is the most portable landscape camera delivering medium format quality in the field.

01-19-2009, 06:20 AM	#14
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	When I went from the K10 to the K20, I did notice that some of my lenses weren't good enough to take full advantage of the high resolution of the K20D sensor. I'm not overly worried about the numbers game, but I did think it interesting that a razor sharp lens on the K10 was slightly soft on the K20 (I focus bracketed a test to prove it to myself). As far as lenses that are good enough to take advantage of the K20 sensor, yes, they exist. The better quality prime lenses that Pentax makes are certainly up to the sensor.

01-19-2009, 06:46 AM	#15
blende8 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Bremen, Germany Photos: Albums Posts: 1,521	Overall I think it is better if the lens is the limiting factor, because if it is the sensor you will get Nyquist artifacts etc. So far we haven't reached this limit though. I have tested already some of my lenses on the K20D and all of them resolve better than the sensor (Center, perfectly focussed).