120mp sensor --> do we really need all those mp?

GaryLH

GaryLH

Veteran
Local time
3:07 AM
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
6,141
View My Gallery
I really think the 50mp that Canon announced was already too big..the 36 from Sony must have been the new start of the mp wars.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2549658574/cp-2015-canon-shows-off-prototype-120mp-cmos-sensor

But does anyone really need a 120mp sensor... For me 16-24mp is really good enough for me. I actually shoot my dp2 Quattro in 5mp raw mode. I might one day pick up a 36mp sensor camera, but only if that camera has a 24f2 lens..I am lazy.. One camera one lens, crop up to about 75 fov.

So the 50mp sensor that Canon has and the rumored one from Sony is really already too big for my usage.

Do we really need a 120mp sensor?

Gary
 
Are we going to have this question come up every time a new MP # is announced?

You might not need it, but someone will find ways to use it. The way I see it, all of the lower MP cameras that everyone says is enough for them will be dirt cheap. If high MP counts aren't your thing... just ignore them.
 
With what's happening in the Television and monitor market it starts to make sense.
Ultra hi-res video devices will be required to create content to fully take advantage of those ultr Hi-res viewing screens.
Canon seems to be thinking about it.
 
jsrockit said:
Are we going to have this question come up every time a new MP # is announced?

You might not need it, but someone will find ways to use it. The way I see it, all of the lower MP cameras that everyone says is enough for them will be dirt cheap. If high MP counts aren't your thing... just ignore them.
Click to expand...

My point here is that any given manufacturer's r&d budget is not limitless. To go do something that to me is more of a "this is what I can do better" type product that may not up the profit outlook for that company is in my mind not a very smart move..

I worked for a company in the past that neglected its core profit sellers to do a top of the pyramid type product. That product never sold well while the competition ate our lunch in our core products because we did not give them the attention they deserved. Our workforce was focused on the other product instead because our vp was so focused on showing on it. With all the layoffs that result, I would say the current workforce is now about 25% of what it used to be 7 years ago.

Canon and Nikon have seen their profit shrink according to latest updates that have been published.

Gary
 
In my work I can get by with 12MP from the D700 and D300. Never print anything bigger than 35cms over the long end from those cameras.

Sometimes I shoot close to a thousand shots from an event or wedding, which all are archived for incidental future purchase by clients, only obviously useless photos get erased. Due to this I 'downgraded' from a D600 to a D700, which I like much better anyway. The 24MP files from the D600 took lots longer to load before editing and ate disk space away quickly, while oversized regarding printing needs.

Nope, no digital sensor with high pixel count for me. 🙂


I enjoy the 50MP scans from the 6x7 negatives that I scan on the Imacon. Somewhere this year I will be having my first shots printed at 63x73cms. From film! 🙄😱

I plan to sell a small series of shots in smaller sizes here soon, to test the waters so to speak.
 
Methinks this sensor is for very special medical or industrial purposes. Even if you or I may not need it, the world is a better place because of it.

On another note, considering how poor shadow noise is on the 5DS samples and Canon's lackluster sensor production abilities...what would ISO 400 look like on this sensor? 😀
 
Just because some people don't, there is no reason to assume that nobody does. If I were still working in advertising photography, I'd want lots of megapixels. A double-page spread in Vogue or a 48-sheet poster is likely to be a lot better with more megapixies.

Cheers,

R.
 
Well one of the reasons why I prefer film photography is that the technical qualities (resolution/noise etc) of my work remains more or less the same. I never have to keep up to date with how technology changes the game. Instead I can focus on trying to improve my photographic eye and how I want to communicate through my images.
Thats why Im completely uninterested/unimpressed with things like gigapixel photography or this high resolution time lapses. There is nothing there except "newness".
 
We had this talk in the 6MP, 10MP and 12MP era - looks like we'll have this on and on.

12MP is already insufficient for the 5k displays which have a pixel count of 14.7MP. Just how many years had it been?

The products almost always create needs for themselves, as the marketers had learnt long ago.
 
Archlich said:
We had this talk in the 6MP, 10MP and 12MP era - looks like we'll have this on and on. 12MP is already insufficient for the 5k displays which have a pixel count of 14.7MP. Just how many years had it been? The products almost always create needs for themselves, as the marketers had learnt long ago.
Click to expand...

Yes. It's funny how the consumers are more driven by the market than the opposite. I pretty much never feel the need to buy any technological device because I actually need it. Most of the time I'm forced into upgrading/buying new because of some indirectly linked circumstance. Like some software (itunes) upgraded and no longer wants to play movies on my old tv etc. Most people seem pretty happy, or at least not outraged, by this whole situation.
 
Archlich said:
We had this talk in the 6MP, 10MP and 12MP era - looks like we'll have this on and on.

12MP is already insufficient for the 5k displays which have a pixel count of 14.7MP. Just how many years had it been?

The products almost always create needs for themselves, as the marketers had learnt long ago.
Click to expand...

This is exactly it, it's not about technology, it's about making money. Same as 5k displays. My brother has a 5k iMac, up close, the screen is quite remarkable, from a normal working distance, I can't tell it's any different.

High MP counts and pixel counts are about making money. Perhaps they come in handy for some, like Roger says, for maybe some professional needs, but it's a happy side effect of the main aim, to sell you something.
 
OP, yes and no.

I shoot very low light a lot. If high mp will keep the noise down then OK. But in general I'm happy in the 24mp to 36 mp range. Most of what I shoot is actually 16mp Fuji anyway.

I wish they would make an affordable rangefinder and a 6mp FF back for my SWC. Flatbed scanned film is = to about 3 or 4 mp P&S. So all these mp are way over what film was.
 
If there's a product with an exploitable, technological specification differential, for use in a scientific and/or artistic application and it also makes money for the manufacturer, how bad can it be?
Some will purchase the thing without a need for the 'exploitable differential', bragging rights of ownership presumably being the intention.
When I was a kid I owned a 10 transistor radio. It said so right on the front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lxforrest
A DIY retro digital camera project - Blog #3 Prototype V -1
Replies
3
Views
388
lxforrest
lxforrest
J
  • Article Article
A Leica Lover’s Guide to Acquiring a Digital M:
2
Replies
26
Views
6K
ranger9
R
lxforrest
A DIY retro digital camera project - Blog #4 Prototype photo test and development update
Replies
1
Views
292
lxforrest
lxforrest
lxforrest
A DIY retro digital camera project - Blog #5 China trip + Prototype 1.0
2
Replies
20
Views
919
Richard G
Richard G
J
  • Article Article
The Rise & Fall of the Kodak Empire:Part 2: How the Colossus of Film was broken by a disruptive technology
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
Muggins
Muggins
Back
Top Bottom