Megapixels - Do we need more? Are we already there?

Do we need more Megapixels

  • I was doing OK with 4Mp

    Votes: 3 4.5%
  • I've got more than enough, thanks

    Votes: 30 45.5%
  • No I need 20, 30, 50, 100 Mp. Bring it on

    Votes: 28 42.4%
  • Doesn't matter, digital will never have the resolution of film

    Votes: 5 7.6%

  • Total voters
    66
This comes from my own observations. I've seen a number of articles on this subject and they all seem to reach different conclusions.

It should be pointed out that megapixels isn't always 1:1 with observable resolution. The mkIII may claim 21mp, but from what I can see it doesn't resolve much, if any, more detail then a Nikon D3 which is 12mp.

Film being analog is a bit tricky to compare directly to digital, the finest areas of detail in film are inconsistent; you may have one spot on the negative that is slightly better then a 12mp digital, others may be worse.

There's also the question of scanning method, since almost everybody prints digitally these days. Without drum scanning, 35mm film will struggle to keep up with 6 or 8mp digital photos. With high end scanning, and PERFECTLY developed film you may surpass a 12mp digital shot... but that's a lot of stars that have to come into allignment.

What can't be denied is films superiority in latitude, color and grain quality.... digital has a ways to go to catch up in those categories.
Good to know. :thumbup:

I was thinking more around total potential though. Compare the very best DSLR on the market to better film and the best film processing and film still comes out ahead. It'd take a lot of stars to come into alignment for me to be able to afford a 1DSIII. :lol: They'd be far more likely to come into alignment if I picked up a cheap film body, put one of my better lenses on it and good film, and paid for top notch processing. That reminds me, I need to grab the yellow pages and see if there's any place around me that processes E6. I'm about to pull the trigger on a film body just to play around with it. :)
 
It's 2008, not 2004. D40 and XTI kits fly out the door at places like Costco for hardly anymore than an advanced point and shoot just a few years ago, inculding and extra lens, and including a memory card. I know plenty of people with DSLRs who don't even bother to post on forums like these. Maybe 25% of the people who post on these forums regularly aren't pros, but that's not even the least bit representative of DSLR and camera buyers as a whole. If that's your baseline, you're just looking at a niche part of the market. A lot of amateurs out there have much nicer equipment than a lot of pros do! :lol:

Just curious, what defines a pro photographer? ;)
 

Most reactions

Back
Top