percepts
Established
I'm building up to possibly buying one of these and I'm curious. It'll get used for wedding shots. Now typically I expect to print at 12x8 inches. The native resolution of an M9 is 5212 pixels wide. My local lab prints at 200 dpi so that would give me a print 26 inches wide. So I'd have to downsize from that native resolution. And as we know, downsing will lose some detail.
So my question is, with a digital camera file is it better to always print from a file which is at the native size of the sensor for optimum print quality? If so, then I would assume I'd be better getting an M8 or finding a lab who print at a higher dpi such as one using a lambda and printing at 400 dpi.
What do you rekon?
So my question is, with a digital camera file is it better to always print from a file which is at the native size of the sensor for optimum print quality? If so, then I would assume I'd be better getting an M8 or finding a lab who print at a higher dpi such as one using a lambda and printing at 400 dpi.
What do you rekon?
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
I think you're vastly overestimating the 'issues.'
Try it with any file. Uprez it. Downsize it. See if you can tell the difference in a print. Even if you can, you can still compensate with unsharp mask. And, for weddings, are you sure you want everything to be as sharp as possible? It's likely the output device won't be able to render any minute difference between "native resolution" and something to which you've converted in PS.
Try it with any file. Uprez it. Downsize it. See if you can tell the difference in a print. Even if you can, you can still compensate with unsharp mask. And, for weddings, are you sure you want everything to be as sharp as possible? It's likely the output device won't be able to render any minute difference between "native resolution" and something to which you've converted in PS.
percepts
Established
so what's the deal with 20 or 40 or more megapixel cameras then? Most images don't get printed bigger than A4. Are we being oversold pixels?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
We do?
As far as I can see this is true only in the sense that a smaller file holds less information than a bigger one. There probably is a tiny loss of detail involved in downsizing but then, you'll not be able to see it in a smaller print.
Even so, personally, I'd go for a higher dpi rate if maximum information is important (which it may not be in wedding shots). The standard for photomechanical repro in books and magazines is normally 300 dpi.
Cheers,
R.
alecgold
Established
I think 98% of pixel-freaking over here is meaningless and useless. If you print at A4 a 10.3Mp M8 is more than enough. More important are your photographic skills (which could improve a lot in my case) and the quality of the glass in front of the sensor (in which Leica is extremely good imho).
I don't know many people that print super high quality in A3, and if you do so, I wonder if your "audience" are going to stand within two feet of the A3 to look at all the individual pixels?!
So if you are printing extreme quality on building sized banners, 40Mp camera's do make sense. If you are an extreme bad photog or you have other circumstances where you need to crop to 20 or 30% of the original and still print A4 or lager, than than 40Mp does make sense.
For mere mortals: start making better pictures/compositions, stop yelping about pixels.
If you want to make digital wedding books, in my amateur opinion M9 will do nicely. you've got enough pixels left to crop pictures and you have enough pixels to print on two opposing pages. But perhaps one of the professional wedding photogs will give their opinion/experience?
Most likely even a M8 will do but you might want to go with a full-frame option. If you are used to film M's that makes the transition much easier. And lets face it, though I'm very happy with my M8, the M9 is a much better product.
Last edited:
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
The M8 will print A3 easily without uprezzing. Many of us have done this. The M9 wil print any size basically, as larger prints will be viewed at large distances. It is really a non-existent problem. Master-printer David Adamson has written extensively on the subject on LUF.
ruslan
Established
For weddings work you will need max MP camera, remember, wedding client can choose any image and ask you to print wall sized photograph, new Pentax 645D is not too pricey and will be great weddings camera, also, downsize an image will make details look sharper.
Last edited:
percepts
Established
it seems to have esscaped peoples notice that the new pentax 645d is only being released in japan in May and as yet there only appears to be one lens for its autofocus system. Besides the lenses from a zeiss ZM won't fit on it.....
nobbylon
Veteran
Printing anything greater than 300 dpi was a waste of time anyway as the human eye can't resolve greater than this at distances beyond around 8 inches and your brain blends the dots anyway. I've done A3 prints with a 6mp Nikon in the past which have been superb so I doubt an M8 or M9 will disappoint.
alecgold
Established
Thanks for the tip, I've been reading a lot of his post on LUF and he did give indeed very usefull tips. About 180 or 360 dpi printing on epsons and about other things. Its very good to read his post, you can really tell he know what he has been doing.
I still have got a lot to learn
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
All Pentax lenses old and new will fit it. It looks like a very interesting camera. But boy, it is ugly!
percepts
Established
All Pentax lenses old and new will fit it. It looks like a very interesting camera. But boy, it is ugly!
Well yes but to get the best out of it I think you will need the lenses designed for it. It's not something I'm looking at.
If an M8 can do A3 happily and and M9 30x20 at extreme high quality then I'd rather have the small and light option where I can swap lenses between my film and digital camera and travel light..
But then a hasselblad will blow the M9 out of the water in image quality terms from what I have read. But the Hasselblad H system makes the M9 look very cheap.
Last edited:
jaapv said:All Pentax lenses old and new will fit it. It looks like a very interesting camera. But boy, it is ugly!
Well yes but to get the best out of it I think you will need the lenses designed for it. It's not something I'm looking at.
If an M8 can do A3 happily and and M9 30x20 at extreme high quality then I'd rather have the small and light option where I can swap lenses between my film and digital camera and travel light..
But then a hasselblad will blow the M9 out of the water in image quality terms from what I have read. But the Hasselblad H system makes the M9 look very cheap.
I agree with both... To get the best from the new 645D, the new lens has an anti-reflective feature on the rearmost lens surface to deal with reflections from the sensor area... where apparently the first surface is the IR Cut filter / dust shaker, in the absence of a low-pass filter.
But, except for that (and the lens's new ultrasonic focusing motor), it has the same functionality as any previous P645 system auto-focus lens, of which there are many. Further, as Jaapv alluded, even the original non-AF 645 lenses are useful in a manual focusing way... plus the same for all the 67 system manual-focus lenses dating back many years (with the Pentax Adapter 645 for 67 lens).
I can envision some wedding work with the 645D, maybe those doing weddings with current MF digital gear will switch. And, given that the Pentax price is not much more than an M9 and top-of-the-line Canikons, some may "move up" to the Pentax for this work. And the Hasselblad H system makes the P645D look inexpensive too!
It will be interesting to see differences in moderate to large print sizes between the M8/9 and 645D. I can often see differences even in 5x7 prints between 35mm film and 645 film, so I wonder if and how that print quality might translate to this step to digital...
Last edited: