HOW MANY MEGAPIXELS DO YOU NEED? YOU MAY BE SURPRISED!
Want to take amazing wildlife photos? Check out my new course with 20 modules and over 5 hours of content, no fluff!
journalofwildlifephotography....
Join me in Botswana in 2024!
www.simondentremont.com/botsw...
My name is Simon d'Entremont and I'm a professional wildlife and nature photographer from Eastern Canada.
Are you struggling trying to understand all the advice about the differences between high and low megapixel cameras? Not sure which you should buy? In this video I'll walk you through the differences, and clear up some common misunderstandings about them.
I use Topaz Labs software for noise reduction, sharpening and upscaling:
topazlabs.com/ref/1943/
My equipment:
Canon R5 body amzn.to/3UQeROc
Canon R6 body amzn.to/3RpYqVX
Canon R5 battery grip amzn.to/3dUrHKF
Canon 100-400 EF II amzn.to/3UQi4gJ
Canon 17-40 L lens amzn.to/3y71MGt
Canon RF 16mm f2.8 amzn.to/3EmPNJ1
FLM Tripod (CP 34 L4 II) and Levelling Head (HB 75) www.flmcanada.com?aff=sdentrem
Sigma Art 50mm f1.4 lens amzn.to/3fkRjAC
Sigma Art 20mm f1.4 lens amzn.to/3CjKto2
Rokinon 135mm f2 lens amzn.to/3SoB3x3
Sirui x-k40 ball head amzn.to/3E7Z5sc
Sirui lightweight Traveler 7C tripod with head amzn.to/3dS9Bca
Manfrotto Video Head amzn.to/3RlZie5
Wimberley Gimbal Head amzn.to/3flhya8
Jackery portable 240 lithium-ion battery amzn.to/3rCzX5r
ProGrade Gold 128 GB CF Express amzn.to/3fyx1nh
ProGrade Cobalt 325 GB CF Express amzn.to/3y3Ywf1
ProGrade Gold 256 GB SD amzn.to/3y0Xssg
Zoom H1n field recorder amzn.to/3Sozob9
Comica shotgun mic amzn.to/3REWN73
Rode Videomic NTG shotgun mic amzn.to/3BRlcQK
Rode Wireless GO II mic set amzn.to/3BUfIoh
Lenscoat neoprene camera bags amzn.to/3SNiqmz
Lencoat rain cover for 500mm F4 amzn.to/3SGtyl2
Falconeyes F7 LCD panel amzn.to/3y75z6F
Lowepro 450 AW large backpack amzn.to/3xZOHyL
Lowepro Flipside 300 small backpack amzn.to/3SOTWt7
Mindshift 36L (closest available) backpack amzn.to/3C0fagy
DJI Mavic Air 2S drone (flymore combo) amzn.to/3M9TuDL
B&W circular polarizer, 77mm amzn.to/3SKc6Mx
B&W 2 stop ND Filter amzn.to/3URyIN6
B&W 6 stop ND filter amzn.to/3y6gs8G
B&W 10 stop ND filter amzn.to/3fwRIjs
Nikon Monarch 5 8x42 binoculars amzn.to/3URprEz
Blackrapid retro-classic shoulder strap amzn.to/3y0wUHt
FjallRaven trekking pants amzn.to/3y77DeV
Heat 3 gloves (shell only) www.theheatcompany.com/en-us/...
Heat Company Merino Wool liners www.theheatcompany.com/en-us/...
HP Omen 17.3" performance laptop amzn.to/3BZ7w69
Synology NAS storage amzn.to/3BXfcWF
16 TB hard drives for NAS amzn.to/3LTdrOW
Music in intro: "Nicer", by Houses on the Hill. Find that, and other sound effects at Epidemic Sounds
share.epidemicsound.com/0fbndn
Follow me on:
Facebook / sdentrem
Instagram / simon.dentremont
VERO vero.co/simondentremont
Website www.simondentremont.com/
What’s the largest print you’ve ever made and how many megapixels was the original? I’d love to know!
A2,45megapixels no cropping, no upsizing, shot with Nikon D850
The Milky way like in my profile photo printed as 24x16 inch from a little canon 200d. It's a blend of 3 truck light painted foregrounds with a 10 image stacked sky but only know it was 23.2mb
This week, I printed a TIF from a 20MP 5DMII to 30x50 gallery wrap on canvas. The printer did use Topaz Gigapixel--so not sure how much that helped. There is no noticeable pixilation or noise on the final print which is of a freight train coming out of the fog. That's my largest print so far and will hang at Norfolk Southern office in Atlanta. Years ago I did a series of lily pad flower pictures that all got printed for a hotel chain (the boring pictures that hang in your hotel room:). Those were all shot on a 6MP original Canon Rebel and were enlarged to 16x20. I just looked at those files this morning and noticed they were all shot with a 100mm 2.8 Macro---lens makes a huge difference too:)
24x20 of a deep crop taken with a D7100 with a 300mm f4 that was up-sampled. From me usual sitting position, 18=24" away, the hummingbird's is sharp enough.
40x28 inch lake landscape, very little editing on lightroom nothing more. Olympus E-M1mk3 with 12-40mm f2,8 lens.
I love how Simon beats technical gibberish with logic.🥰
Yes 😂 😂 I agree,I inherited 2 really nice in excellent condition Nikon D-300 AND a Nikon D-90 Dslr's from after my Father passed away last year& I love them.Simon just saved me alot of money 😆 Because I was going to trade them in& get higher megapixel cam,BUT I did the same test Simon talks about& Me& a couple of friends an my lady don't see noticeable difference blur etc.As long as your not"breathing hot breath" 🤭all up close,its NOT huge difference! The average photographer doesn't need super megapixel cams.UNLESS they're really making massive posters etc* 12+mp is enough from both my cams and we've printed out poster sized pics an they're great looking.....Simon you are absolutely awesome,witty and very intelligent sir!Stay creative an we LOVE YOUR CHANNEL& YOUR ENTHUSIASTIC ENERGY!Thank you for all you do ✌🙏
14 minutes long?? I've seen this answered in 30 seconds on Kelby One.
@@jnielsen1956 Still you had to watch a 14 min vid.
@@NSA.Monitored.Device Ha, ha. No, I moved on after a minute and a half.
@@jnielsen1956Funny how you devaluate your "point" one way or another.^^
I just found Simon’s video collection on YT. He speaks clearly, with some pace, and doesn’t include content that’s unrelated to the subject(s) of the video(s), staying “on task.” He provides tremendous clarity to what are generally pretty confusing topics. His videos are really, really well done, and his captured images, used in the videos, are quite impressive. I’m subscribing so I don’t miss future content. Thank you, Simon. 😊
Too kind! Thanks!
The old man's not madly chasing views one of the best in the niche
When creating a billboard as a graphic designer, I was so nervous to see the outcome when learning it was 15dpi. They gave me a test cropped section of the picture bc I wanted to check colours and it looked like a blur.... When viewing it from across the street it was sharp as anything and so happy as it cost a lot to put up. I've never worked that big
Hey Simon, Just found your channel and you're a great presenter. I go on a trip tomorrow in the Kimberleys (aus)... For landscapes is there any use for a 50mm prime lens or just go with a 18-85... I thought it would be fun to take a nice camera...
I do professional work and handle large format print and can say high DPI isn't needed. It also costs more to print and you'll never notice it.
It was interesting to see the upscaled duck eye at 9:57 looking sharper than either the 18MP or 3MP image.
I recently visited the offices of a company I used to work for, and they still have several 18x24 photos hanging that I took in 2001 on a 3.1mp Canon D30. Back then I couldn’t imagine it how it could get any better.
I still have my D30. It takes brilliant photos with that 50 mm.
I had Canon D30 somewhere around 2000, the image quality was dismal compared to modern cameras. In fact the image quality was improving by leaps and bounds at that time, so every year the resolution was doubling and noise was reduced. I think in 5 years I had it, its price went down from $3000 to $300.
until recently i was shooting on a nikon D50, which is "only" 6 megapixels. the photos it took were gorgeous, and it's a shame i had to replace it. i'm happy with my olympus om-d em10, of course, but "only" 6 megapixels is good enough in 2023.
i actually want that camera because it has the lowest noise of almost any camera..
Sony Mavica was my first camera. 0.6Mp. Great for candids because no one recognized it as a camera. People thought I was watching TV.
In this day and age of 45 and 60 megapixels, the SWEET SPOT is still 24MP in my opinion....just the right file size, plenty of details, fast enough for slower cards, plenty of cropping headroom and won't degrade high ISO IQ that much
I had to watch to this video again, some months later, to reassure myself that my Canon APS-C 24MP camera would meet my needs for the foreseeable future. I knew I would get clear, concise information; info I could trust. Thank you Simon. Best wishes to you and yours for 2024, from a fellow Bluenoser.
Go for it neighbor!
In 2009, my wife and I took our honeymoon in Victoria, B.C. While there, I just happened to get a photo out over the water of a lighthouse on an island with a tall masted ship going by in the background. Truthfully, it's not a great photo, but we liked it, and it reminds us of our time there. The image was taken with a Canon 40D, which had, as I recall, a 10 MP sensor. Now I cropped the original image by about a factor of two in both axes, which means the end result only had 2.5 MP. We had that printed on canvas at 36 inches on the diagonal and it hangs on the wall of my wife's home office above a day bed. You don't view it closer than about 6 feet away. To my untrained amateur eye, it looks great!
Beautiful island and always enjoyed my visit there. It would be even more awesome if a humpback whale 🐳 graced the lighthouse background. But yeah even 10 MP photos are good enough for large prints. I worked for a large format printer and we'd print all sizes and generally the larger the print the lower the DPI needed. We've done prints from 20 years ago that's only 2 MP and with a bit of enhancements they still look great.
Damn! This channel is very informative. No fluff, just straight to the point. Good work.
I did a shoot in 2013 with 18 megapixel camera and it was on 80 feet wide billboard..... It was looking tremendously sharp..... I used the viewing distance calculations and applied output sharpening technique in a very effective manner..... I'm glad that you made this vide as many many people are extreamly confused in megapixel war... Keep up great work
Mr. d'Entremont, you are exactly the best communicator that I have ever listened to. Making all the controls in the camera, concepts about resolution, focus, real need of pixels, etc. something easy to understand goes a long way. Simple language is the secret of instruction and you are probably the best I have found in my life in possession of this art. Thank you for these videos that demystify the "bumba-bumba and yada-yada I hava found in books and classrooms...
This man is an absolute genius!
Simon, this is another high value video. Like all of your work, is comprehensive, accurate and presented in an easy to comprehend delivery. Thanks for both the information and the comprehensible presentation.
Would have been a high value video if it had been under 5 minutes. Now it was unnecessarily long
@@jaakkotahtela123 , your comment is easy to make and even easier to think is correct only if you understand the concepts involved. If you knew the concepts before seeing the video then for you any length of time was wasted once you saw the complete video. On the other hand, if you knew nothing about the subject and only saw the conclusion you would know the answer but could never explain it to anybody, and thus would justifiably have little confidence in the answer. How do I know this? I have seen several presentations and only watched this one to the end precisely because I recognized and appreciated its value.
Many thanks!
@@jaakkotahtela123🙄
@@iridium8341 , the comments in the remainder of the thread says you are in the minority.
Great advice Simon. As a 12 MP shooter on my old Nikon D300s, I couldn't be happier.
Same here, also shooting Nikon D300s, great camera.
Same here, I love both of mine, one with the grip and one without. Love the controls on the outside. John
D300s is a terrific camera. A delight to shoot with and still turns out great images.
I’m still shooting with the D300, D700, and FujiS5Pro (which was marketed as 12MP, but technically 1/2 that because of the pixel design of the sensor). All of these bodies continue to produce beautiful warm photos, with a color pallet seemingly lost as newer and “better” cameras made them extinct. Guys are swarming back to their digital roots in the D700, and are all saying the same thing: color, color, color! These old bodies deliver a film like feel with their images. We have printed 16x23 photos that look crazy beautiful. Most of my work is portraits, so these bodies will continue to be work horses until they give up the ghost.
@@wildcamping189 I have been loving using the s5 pro, I’ve been shooting the canon 5d classic for years and am enjoying the fun little Fuji.
My son (6) is autistic, and he takes photos of things to help him handle transitions or having to put away/eat things he isn't ready to part with. Currently he has to use his tablet but that has quite a lot of problems to it. We're hoping to get him a good, budget, older digital camera he can use instead. We brought one of those kid cameras a couple years back and it's so awful you can hardly tell what it is. 🙄 This video is really helping me understand what we need to get for him to get nice photos and hopefully grow his love for photography. :)
Always the calm voice of well informed reasoning. Thank you
Most knowledgeable KZheadr I've seen. Thankyou for handling complicated topics and making them make sense!!!
glad to see your channel blow up so much. I feel lucky to be getting into bird photography right after you started posting videos. I've learned so much in the last couple of months, and your videos are the perfect length to go back and rewatch when I feel like I need to understand a specific thing better
I only recently discovered your channel and your presentations on complex subjects are really fantastic and very well done!
Glad you like them!
Where is the LOVE button for this explanation! #KNOWLEDGE #GAMECHANGER Bravo, Simon! Bravo! 💪📷💯🙏
Simon, your explanations are so clear and easy to follow! Thanks for the work you put into them.
Thanks Simon. Great video. I've been shooting with Nikon D750 for years, both day and night and it's just fine at 24mp. A 30x40" print looks great
This video could not possibly be any better. Very clear explanations that make a complex topic understandable to almost anyone. Thank you.
I'm a commercial photographer who uses 100-200mp digital backs. The thing most people don't touch on is having the ability to make deep crops for the purpose of maintaining depth of field. I've shot automotive campaigns in studio for major manufacturers. When shooting a 3/4 angle it's necessary to pull the camera further away to have the car sharp bumper to bumper. You can only stop down so far until diffraction starts working against you. For professional commercial work more megapixels is always better. But you need to know how to use them correctly.
I guess this will depend on whats available for your system but tilt shift lenses are made exactly for that purpose.
@@BenAndrews tilt-shift lenses were made not for commercial photography, tbh. I'm sure that you can use them in that way, buy ususally they're less sharp and made for FF or cropped cameras. 100-200mp digital backs that were mentioned are Phase One, Hasselblad or Pentax ones and medium format only. There are no tilt-shift lenses for such big sensors on the market as far as I can remember
@@casualcoffeeshooter of course there are tilt-shift lenses for medium format. I've used 2 of them. Not sure what brand, since I used them 15 years ago in the studio where I was studying photography. There are quite a few options. A number of bellows based options that are around, some are mated to a lens and some allow you to put on any lens you like in whatever system its designed for. A quick search on google shows Hasselblad make a tilt shit adapter. I suspect thats similar to one I used, since we shot our product photos on a Hass. Theres also the Fotodiox Pro ROKR adapters, and a bunch of bellows options. I own a Samyang tilt for canon and have adapted to fuji. Fujifilm GFX also has tilt shift options. Thats not cheap tilt shift and it covers the larger sensors and is adapted to some digital backs. Not a professional option though.
@@casualcoffeeshootersure there are. Hasselblad has an adapter or you put the back on a view camera
Wouldn't a longer focal length lens achieve the same effect without cropping? Or is your point that the higher pixel count saves you from needing another lens? In that case, it's a matter of redundancy; you have more pixels than you need, so that you can afford to lose some. I don't think the video is making the case that fewer pixels is better, just the the benefits of more pixels is more limited and specific than often assumed.
Not only the voice of reason, but with the ability to explain it in a meaningful way. Thank you Simon.
If I was going through college again I'd seek out any courses you teach. Great clarity of information, presented with an amount of detail and comparisons that makes so much sense. A great match with how I enjoy learning.
One of the internet's best explainers sheds some light on the megapixel measure mystery ... . Thanks / Merci ...
Wow, thank you!
16'x8' print from a slightly cropped D3 Nikon. It was hung on my Studio wall and people walked past at about 4 to 10 foot away. In about 10 years of customers and fellow professionals walking past and viewing it, not one ever questioned its quality. It was printed straight out of Photoshop without much work done on it bar contrast and exposure control. In fact I actually ADDED digital grain to it which is something I do to pretty much every image I ever take! I gain quite a few commissions because of that one image.
After watching your videos I sometimes have to admit to myself that I had originally learned or understood certain aspects of photography incorrectly. And I realize I've been wrong because of how you make these somerimes complicated subjects so easy to grasp. Also I like the more advanced photographer approach. I've seen too many videos going over stuff I've known for years. Tnanks and please keep making these informative videos because I can not learn too much about photography.
I used to be eager to upgrade to higher mp cameras back in the day, because I thought there was a benefit of going from an 8 mp Canon 20D to 10 mp 40D to a 15 mp 50D, but that cooled off once I got to 18-20 mp in the 7D bodies. It seemed like diminishing returns at that point. A change in perspective also came when I printed heavily cropped photo I took of a Lapland Longspur on ice. I wasn't very close and couldn't get any closer. It was a fantastic photo opportunity, but I had to crop it down to around 2.0 mp to get the composition I wanted in the end. I upscaled it to print at 11x17@360ppi (my printer prints at 360dpi). The detail on the print was perfectly good when hung on a gallery wall I had set up at my workplace. I was astounded that it turned out as it did. That was years ago with software that didn't upscale as good as present day software.
I printed a 40 inch morning sunrise /back lit photo from a 12mp Lumix Fz300 with a 25 -600 consistent f2.8 lens . The senor was the size of my little finger nail . I was totally amazed to how good it was . Way back in film days , I printed a 30 inch photo from a throw away fuji camera/film in box . To get the best photo I used a light meter to take the photo when the light was 250 at F11 --- either 400 or 800 asa film !. I used that photo at our mini lab to sell fuji throw away cameras . On another wall I had a similar 30 inch photo printed from a 645 120 negative . It was only when people had a comparison that they could see the and understand the difference --- nothing has really changed. There is so much BS out there ; mostly from the very early days of digital about file size/print size Today I'm totally happy with Olympus cameras between 16 and 20 px --- I think lol What gives me a laugh "best viewed FULL SCREEN" .
I like that you just get straight into the details and you don't waste my time. Your explanations always give me an epiphony moment!! You are a great instructor!!!!
You're a legend Simon. Thanks for sharing some of your incredible knowledge on your channel!!
do you teach because you would make an awesome teacher. ❤
Simon your video was exactly what I was looking for! Straight to the point with the details that were missing from other tips and a remarkable analysis from a professional photographer. Thanks a lot!
Watched all the way to the end, great video - enjoyed the info, subscribed about 10 minutes in and liked/shared!
It’s always nice to hear accurate information
Absolutely awesome video. You clarified a major hang-up I had for years. The « pixel-peeping » part is sooooo on point! And the matter of lens resolution (never thought of it before) brings a whole lot of clarity to the issue. Thank you for the time, care, and expertise you put into this video. Subscribed!
Hoho there Simon,I started toy photography last year and of course I shot with my cell.Now that I have graduated to a Nikon D40x I find your videos very helpful.So keep up the good work.😲🤙
Sounds well-informed, logical, and sane. The mark of a professional. Your photos are great!
I appreciate the break down of what our eye sees vs what we need. Very informative for someone new into all of the photography jargon like myself.
Best video on this subject I've ever seen on the internet.
This channel is gold !! I feel like I learnt more than doing a photography major 😊
Clarity, brevity, and veracity. Wonderful video!
FINALLY !!!!!!!!!!!! I have been looking for this information for decades ( since the year 2000 ) THANK YOU !!!!!!!
You are welcome!
Great explanation on when more megapixels matter and when they don’t. Love your style of teaching with your videos Simon. Always worth viewing. Greetings from 🇦🇺
Enjoy ALL your posts. Thanks for taking the time to share extensive knowledge…
I love how empirical this video is. It's helpful especially for photographers.
I once (early digital days) made an 11x14 from a 3MP point and shoot that was fantastic. The other great thing about DXO's database relates to age: when evaluating sensors, they also supply the year the sensor was manufactured, which is significant since - as time goes on - these sensors get better and better. Thanks for the video.
Thanks Simon. You are just the best to explain the meaning between censor and lenses. Short and clear!! I subscribe to your channel.
Simon just a fantastic video and one that every photographer (beginner or professional) should watch. Great perspective and insights as always. Keep up the great work!
Excellent Explanation! Thank you!
This is very helpful! Love your videos!
I'm so glad!
Great advice Simon, I have an R5 and love it but this is an even better argument to grab a Rt6 Mark II for my backup rig. Love your work!
Your photography is astounding! And thank you for the clear concise information.
Simon is a genius. I love his videos 👏
Too kind!
I have a lovely framed print of one of my children. It measures 19 inches by 11 inches and was taken on my original Galaxy Note phone, with a camera sensor of just 2 megapixels. It is adequately sharp for the style of print and looks good. I see little appreciable difference between prints made with my Canon 40d, 5d mkiii, and my r5 when printed for hanging, mounted in a frame, for home use
Original galaxy note n7000 had 8 mp camera
@@deepgeny1 You are right. The front facing camera was 2 megapixels. My mistake....the print still looks good though
In 2005 or so, I made a full bleed, 16X20 print of a cheetah sleeping in a tree for my dentist, shot in the wild in Africa, not in a zoo. His image was effectively 1600 pixels on the long side. It's been hanging in his office since then. We were both astonished at the quality, admittedly from an excellent printer - my (long dead) Epson 9800.
Thank you for this invaluable information! You are really helping those with any type of gear. To understand what you have first and the value before upgrading and saying your gear isn't capable.
Thank you for the perspective Simon. I agree with everything you said. I can only say that I'm one of the people who looks at detail. I see a large print, I stand back to soak in the overall scene, and then I am compelled to move in and look at the details. I've always been that way.
Some of my best A3 prints were made from a 16 MP m4/3 bodies, paired with good quality Olympus primes, like the 45/1.2 Pro. Stunningly sharp.
Higher pixel counts come in handy for edits. You can alway throw out data, later. But you can never creat data you never had.
I took up photography in 1970 when I joined the US Navy. I travelled all over the Mediterranean, Caribbean, etc. Even spent Christmas 1972 in Rome! I enjoyed your video very much.
I started to really love your videos. They are very informitive and expressed in very understandable way. Great job. And also, your tone is very nice too.
This video is refreshing. I am so tired of gear pushers with GAS . I just watched a video where a kid said 16 mp is enough for social media if that's all you want to do. People need to get real 5 mp is enough for social media. But then again I'm old and come from 120 film my first digital camera for work was a 5d and I made a lot of money with that 12mp camera. I have had GAS a few times before I remembered that cameras do not take better pictures for you. Sorry this is my weekly rant.
Another great video Simon! This is a point that a lot of people seem to overlook around the printing resolution versus the viewing distance. On a slightly different note I've got a Canon R3 that is a relatively low megapixel body but what I have been finding is that the high ISO performance is very, very clean allowing me to shoot very close to sunset at high ISOs and still get good images after doing some noise recovery in DXO.
This is a great video. Thank you, Simon.
This is the best video on the subject I've seen. You might have told everything there is to tell. Well done.
Simon, you're spot on. Two of my favorite cameras are my 18-year-old Canon 5D Classic (12.8MP) and a Fuji X-Pro1. And I produce wonderful prints with both. I have a client who is a classic race car collector and I often make prints for him that are 7-9 feet wide from 35mm Kodachrome scans. Once I got the viewing distance idea through his head, he's been over the moon with the prints I've made for his garage.
Great video. Megapixels is definitely not the most important thing on digital. I absolutely love shooting with my old Sony A100, not only because of how good it feels to use, but because I simply love the results I get from its "measly" 10 megapixel CCD sensor and its very pleasing, natural look. With some final refinements using Affinity Photo, I get really beautiful results!
Sometimes I forget to pay attention to what you are saying, because im lost starting at your background. Awesome setup Simon. Thanks for the videos!
Finally a voice of sanity in this wilderness. I use Fuji XH2 and XT4 cameras in my work, but my everyday carry is a Panasonic GX80 with “only” 16MP. When I use prime lenses I regularly make A2+ prints from it that are tack sharp with no visible noise from a normal viewing angle. A good friend is a professional portrait photographer who still uses his 12MP Nikon, and he frequently makes exhibition prints that are over 2 meters on the long side. Most exhibition viewers assume he’s using a medium format camera.
This is a great explanation. I used to generate 100mpxl images from 6x7 film negatives and the detail was amazing. But you had to be a few inches from the print to see it.
I recently bought the Fuji x-h2s and it's 26mp stacked sensor over the Fuji xh2 and it's 40mp sensor. I absolutely love the speed and video advantages of the xh2s, and my photograph needs will never need the full 40mp range. Great video Simon! You and Pal2Tech are my go-too sources for education, as I'm pretty new to photography.
Boss, that's all i needed to hear. Thanks for the valuable lesson
While working at the Department of Veterans Affairs in Sacramento/Mather we purchased a Canon D30 in 2003 it was a 2.1megapixel. I made a 24 x36 inch print of one of my staff and it worked perfectly using photoshop CS
Your knowledge is absolutely insane and absolutely appreciated. Thanks so much for sharing with the rest of us photogs and I look forward to more content from you :)
My pleasure!
Hey Caltek, I’m working on a video course for wildlife photography. Can I use your comment in promotional material, with attribution? Thanks
@@simon_dentremont certainly. Thanks for asking.
Your videos are always exceptionally well done with great info, but this one is phenomenal! I am an amateur living in New England, with an a7iii Sony. Just upgraded glass from Tamron 28-200 to Tamron 70-180. ( glass is far more important then the body) Years back, I had a 10 megapixel Canon with a entry level zoom from Canon. I photographed a friends wedding with it and I put the pics in a wedding album for them. The bride & groom later told me that they never bought the professional photographer’s work, because mine looked better to them.
I am so glad I found this video, it helped me pick a camera that suits my actual need instead of just picking a camera with highest MP.
Thanks for the great video--most people have no idea what resolution they need in the real world. FWIW, the human eye can only resolve approximately 1 radian (1/60 degree) of their field of view. That means that if you are looking at an image which occupies 30 degrees of your horizontal field of view (what you would see looking at a movie screen from the dead-center seat of a well designed movie theater) a 1.5:1 aspect ratio image taken with a 2.16 megapixel sensor would look just as sharp as one taken with anything with more pixels. That, BTW is essentially how the 1080x1920 HDTV resolution standard was determined. Of course, as you noted, having a greater resolution than 2+ megapixels allows for cropping, but still. . . I've also sold many, many, 16x20 images from a 16 megapixel Olympus (admittedly with great glass) that are strikingly sharp.
Great video, I constantly tell people that High MPX usually works only for people that crop really heavily or do high detail retouching. My friend got stolen his image 800x600 and it was used for building big billboards. I always laugh when KZhead photographers say that you need more mpx for billboards 😂
I'm so glad I found your channel. Have watched many of your videos. Thank you!
I’m just a rookie, but found this to be very helpful. Thanks for sharing. Still trying to wrap my head around the formula to calculate biggest size print. 😊
Excellent video Simon. I really enjoy all of your weekly vids. I have printed about a dozen 20 x 30 acrylic prints and about 2 dozen canvas prints 20 x 30 and up to 36 x 48 with Canon 5D M4 with no problem! About 10 years ago one of my photos was used on a roadside billboard, At the time i was shooting with the Canon 40d 10 meg. camera. I even think i cropped it slightly. It looked very good as you were riding by it! I have several prints up to 16 x 20 taken with the 4 meg. Konica/Minolta point and shoot that look great as well. I still sell prints from that camera! I have the R6 which I absolutely love because it's a low light beast. I have printed up tp 13 x 19 and they look fantastic. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and expertise with us Simon. Happy shooting.... John
Such a good video. Honestly I anguished over the R5 vs R6; eventually going with the R5 because of the ability to crop. In my type of wildlife photography you can’t get as close as you want (usually have to stay in the vehicle). If I had to take the decision again, but R5 vs R6ii, I’d probably go R6ii for the better AF. Being a bit Zen about it: pretty much any new mirrorless is going to produce images that were almost impossible a few years ago!
Thank you for the amazing content. That is science!
This is some very good advice. I hope more people see this and take that advice seriously.
Great video. As a, theoretically, retired professional photographer, I now use the micro four thirds system of cameras. The two bodies I currently own are by Olympus, and are 16mp. I've happily printed images up to 40 inches by 30 inches, and the results look fabulous, completely supporting your comments regarding print sizes. In actual fact, they still stand up well, even under much closer viewing conditions 🙂
Same here. I "upgraded" from the E-M1 to the MkII because I felt I "had to" even tho I was perfectly happy with the original. Now I may upgrade to the E-M5 III simply for the lighter weight.
How many MP do you need? A very easy question to answer, as many pixels as make you happy. What makes one person happy is not the same what makes another person happy. And frankly, everybody is only concerned with their own happiness not somebody else. I know that I'm happy with 42MP from my Sony and not happy with 24MP from the other cameras I used, which includes Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Fuji.
Can you recommend a professional printing company that you use for large prints? Thanks!
Similar, 67 here; been using 16MP bodies for years; 99.99% of my stuff is never printed- monitor viewed,....so no worries.
I'm pretty sure that most people have an "over inflated" idea as to how many megapixels are required for a good looking page (A4 or letter) sized photo print and thoroughly outlandish expectation for a quart-page newspaper image. Up until very recently, billboard posters had "rosette" pixels which were almost 1/4" across, so even the resolution required for "the side of a building" sized prints is far lower than most people would expect. Of course, this is all presuming that most of the captured image is used, without much cropping and trying to blow up much fewer pixels into an acceptable printed image.
Great video! One point I would note is that the DxOMark score in P-Mpix is best considered as a ratio to the sensor resolution that it was tested on. When I was shopping for pro quality Micro 4/3 lenses, I was crestfallen to find that the sharpest lens is only 16 P-Mpix, compared to over 30 for the best Canon and Nikon lenses! But they are actually about the same in optical quality.
Glad I found your site. I'm older than dirt and I love shooting my 4X5 with a digital or scanning back. People often say " I can do the same with my phone" and I say than that is what you should be doing and continue doing what (I love. Thanks, Sid
One of the best videos I have seen - rather than the usual sale pitches an honest assessment of real world needs. Thank You for a refreshing view.
Wow, thanks!
Upon running across your YT channel, I immediately subscribed. Your ability to present complex topics in a brief and concise way without becoming boring, is a gift that’s hard to find. You have become one of my few “go to “ sources for pro level photography knowledge. You have taught me a lot and I thank you. Please continue the great work. Your photos are predictably amazing!
Wow, thank you
This is the reason I chose the Nikon Z7ii over the Z6ii. I crop my photos quite alot and the 45mp was just the better choice for me. I cant wait to start shooting with it and the Z 180-600mm. (I also spent the difference on the camera itself instead of buying a teleconverter, especially with a variable aperture lens)
Simon, I have never seen analysis at that detail. Kudos to you
This is the best explanation so far.
Great video. My first digital SLR was a Nikon D40 with 6Mp. Using it with the kit zoom I have printed a 500X900mm (20X36") landscape and it is great. It is framed an hanging in my lounge. Viewing distance is the key. Even at reading distance it is still sharper than most cell phones will get at a quarter of that size.
Being very new to photography, I wanted to add something I learned from coming over from astrophotography. One thing I did, wrong or right, I went pixel chasing with my astro camera (specially cooled cameras). The thing that really stuck out to me more than the importance of resolution, MP, or whatever, is really the pixel size. The smaller the pixel, the lower the noise (kind of, has to do with the electron well), and the crisper the pictures. That was really important to me and can really help make you images pop. One one to "figure out" the pixel size and kind of why people go down these rabbit holes to get the highest pixel is that they are somewhat related. The higher the pixel count on a the same sensor, the smaller the pixel, and the sharper it looks. With that being said, I recently bought an a7r IV, which takes amazing pictures, and have a dedicated astro camera that is only 9MP, BUT both have the same pixel size. Thinking about it, I could go the route of a crop sensor and a cheaper camera than the a7R IV, and create mosaics with Photoshop (what I did with the astro camera), but I have to admit the larger field of view I get with the a7R IV is just so nice.
That is interesting, I would have thought the smaller the pixel the less signal. When you get to photon level (like I think astrophotography goes) the noise in the signa (not camera or ccd) is quantum noise limited which is sqrt(N) so from that point of view signal to noise ratio is N/sqrt(N). If you have 100 photons you S/N is 100/sqrt(10) = 10:1 , but if you double the pixel size you collect 400 photons and your S/N is 400/sqrt(400) = 20:1. Also electronics noise is independent of signal so more signal better S/N which also points to the benefit of a larger pixels size. But what do I know, I'm probably wrong.
Hi Simon Very well explained. Thank you for taking the time to put this video together. Regards Paul
I had an old Nikon (can’t even remember the model) that was 4 mp. I still have 8x10 and 11x14 pictures on my wall today that I took with that camera. I now have a Z6 and Z9 and wonder how I did it before with such a small camera sensor. Watching this video reminded me that sometimes bigger isn’t always needed. Great video!