Here's a just published article by David Pogue, the NY Times tech guy, who explains the reasons why the more megapixels a camera has doesn't mean that its pictures are better....and that all this hype and spin about megapixels is nothing but a marketing ploy by the camera manufaturers to sell more expensive cameras, and to unecessarily accelerate obsolescence.
In a test, he and his associates compared large prints using the 16.7-megapixel Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II flagship camera in a studio, three photos of the same subject were taken at three different resolutions: 7 megapixels, 10 and 16.7. The results were virtually the same.
So are the photographs using the 16.7 mps Canon virtually identical to those using a Canon EOS 30D 8.2 mps? In my view, I think they would be very close...and almost impossible to tell apart unless the photographs are blown up to print sizes such wall-size retail displays where the 16.7 mps would have the advantage. However to state the obvious, the lens used on both cameras should be the same.
Read the article:
Breaking The Megapixel Myth.
POV | Netflix's Ripley | Monochrome Awakening
Inspector Pietro Ravini of the Rome Police (Netflix) I've been watching "Ripley", the recent Netflix which is a masterpiece of...
-
Chinatown 65:24 by Tewfic El-Sawy on Exposure I recently decided to experiment with the 65:24 aspect ratio option in my GFX50R (and fo...
-
Image Copyright © Phil Borges-All Rights Reserved Three years ago, Phil Borges partnered with the organization CARE to bring attention to th...
-
And for large sized photographs: Suki by Tewfic El-Sawy on Exposure