How many MP do I need..?

[tsabary]

I'm currently using a micro 4/3 which I enjoy, bur giving it's smaller sensor I feel like I'm not getting enough pixels for big prints as I would like.

I would like to be able to print pictures as big as 2*3 meters. How many MP do I need..? I tried to use a formula I found but I got 850 MP (seems a bit futuristic for now).

Other than that, I'm a bit confused about how to pick my DSLR. I will be traveling Asia next year for a very long time and would like to have a great camera and lenses (for my budget). I don't want it to be beginners level obviously but also not a kit for 3-4 thousand. something in between.
I'll be doing mostly street photography, portraits and some landscapes. Help..?

**I'm thinking of spending around 1500-2000 for a body and 2-3 lenses. I'll buy refurbished to lower costs.

 

[tirediron]

If you're going to do a LOT of really big prints such as 2x3 meters, then it would make sense (IMO) to invest in something like a D800; you should have no problem finding a used one for <$2000. With respect to your calculation which arrived at 850Mp; your premise is flawed. That is: The larger the image, the farther away from it you will [normally] be when viewing. Early in the digital era, it wasn't uncommon for billboard images to be shot with a 2Mp camera.

Now, if you want to view these images from up close and have 8x10 level detail, you certainly can, and with just about any camera on the market. It's simply a matter of shooting multi-image panoramas. Check out Giga-pan for more info on that.

 

[Light Guru]

I would like to be able to print pictures as big as 2*3 meters. How many MP do I need..? I tried to use a formula I found but I got 850 MP (seems a bit futuristic for now).

It's hardly futuristic. Large format film has been able to produce images with resolution like that since before both of us were born. A 4x5 negative well scanned would be equal to about 200 MP and an 8x10 negative well scanned would be about 800 MP

With that said you don't always need a high MP image to print really big because nobody is going to be viewing a 2x3 meter print from the same viewing distance as you would view a 11x14 inch print.

 

[qleak]

I would like to be able to print pictures as big as 2*3 meters. How many MP do I need..?

It depends on the viewing distance you expect from your 2x3m prints.

You could be shooting billboards with your micro 4/3 camera with photo-realistic results. The key is the viewer will be pretty far away. Up close it may not look so hot.

Looking at paintings in an art gallery, they look different depending on the distance you view them at.

Only in special cases like life size cardboard cutouts or painting like gallery prints do you really need anything higher resolution.

Here is an article describing this effect.

 

[D-B-J]

Like John said, a D800. I've printed mine (granted only at 20x30" and the amount of detail is Mindblowing. The D800 spits out the most detailed files I've ever seen, short of getting into a $10000 Medium format camera.

Jake

 

[goodguy]

One of these 3 cameras D800 or D810 or Sony A7r all share same sensor with 36MP.
If money is tight I would go for a used D800, amazaing camera and even more amazing sensor!!!

 

[photoguy99]

60 lp/mm on an 8x10 negative sounds a little aggressive. I'd buy 300MP though.

Minor quibble obviously.

Printing critically up-close sharp 2x3 meter prints is gonna be pretty challenging.

 

[bribrius]

Nikon d5200 is 24 mp right? with a couple decent lenses should put him in the range he wants.

 

[tirediron]

Nikon d5200 is 24 mp right? with a couple decent lenses should put him in the range he wants.

Yep... it's just a matter of establishing the viewing distance.

 

[bribrius]

Nikon d5200 is 24 mp right? with a couple decent lenses should put him in the range he wants.

Yep... it's just a matter of establishing the viewing distance.

I was kind of thinking on his price too. 1500-2k INCLUDING lenses. what good is a d800 with no lens? 5200 gives more room within his asked budget maybe??.

 

[tirediron]

Nikon d5200 is 24 mp right? with a couple decent lenses should put him in the range he wants.

Yep... it's just a matter of establishing the viewing distance.

I was kind of thinking on his price too. 1500-2k INCLUDING lenses. what good is a d800 with no lens? 5200 gives more room within his asked budget maybe??.

Good point!

 

[The_Traveler]

I would be hard pressed to find a camera less amenable to street shooting and a long trip in Asia than a fullsize dslr like the D800.
I never travel without a backup body and at least 3 lenses. With a D800 you are talking about a significant amount of weight and volume and money.
And you have to keep that kind of concentrated value close becuase it represents too many multiples of years salary to leave in low cost hotel rooms.

Secondly, maneuvering a FS dslr and those big lenses means you will stick out even more on a crowded street where everyone but you is Asian.
I happily have moved to a m4/3.
My entire armamentarium of 2 bodies, 4 lenses, batteries, etc. fits in a messenger bag and weighs less than a body lens combination and its goes everywhere with me, I nevr have to worry about my extra stuff stashed back in the room or hold 20 kg on my lap during a long bus ride.

 

[elemental]

I would be hard pressed to find a camera less amenable to street shooting and a long trip in Asia than a fullsize dslr like the D800.

I'm also a recent MFT convert, and one of the biggest reasons is how useful it is for travel. You can't print a picture you never take, and I found my full-size Nikon spent more time in my backpack/room/back at home. If I were going on a yearlong trip, I'd feel great about an OM-D, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, a wide prime (plenty to choose from), and a zoom of some sort to cover the remaining focal lengths. That's maybe $1k of glass, and would make an excellent travel setup that's the same size as a DSLR and kit lens.

Also, an MFT body and that 20mm Panasonic would be an excellent street shooting setup: Fast, small, and way less noticeable than something D800-sized. You won't get the same resolution, but it's not like you're talking about a 6 megapixel camera.

 

[tsabary]

I'm really having a hard time deciding whether to replace it or not. I'm using an Oly Om-d em-5, so as far as 4/3 go I'm pretty happy with it.

 

[KmH]

It is not just about how many MP.

Have you considered pixel pitch?
How about 'crop factor' and FoV?
You also have to consider image content, image quality, and the device used to make a large print.

If you have a 4/3 image sensor with 24 mp, and a full frame image sensor with 24 MP, each of the 24 million pixels the FF image sensor has are substantially larger than the pixels the 4/3 image sensor has.

Larger pixels equals more resolution, and a better SNR (signal-to-noise-ratio).

Making prints is an art into itself.
You will benefit by learning more about how to prepare a digital image for printing, and technical considerations related to print making.

There are not a lot of places that have devices that can print 2x3 meters (approx 72" x 108"). Of course, the printer needs to be provided with high quality, properly prepared images before they can make a high quality print.

The Digital Negative: Raw Image Processing in Lightroom, Camera Raw, and Photoshop
Fine Art Printing for Photographers: Exhibition Quality Prints with Inkjet Printers
The Digital Print: Preparing Images in Lightroom and Photoshop for Printing