Lens Quality versus Photo Resolution

[Mike K]

I've got a Canon 60D, 18MP resolution. If I use medium JPEG quality for the most part, will using high quality lenses like Canon L series really matter or would I have be to shooting in Raw with medium to high resolution? I'm thinking about investing in some righteous lenses (hopefully they'll be used for 20 years or so) and just want to be sure I'm spending my money wisely.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Derrel]

I've got a Canon 60D, 18MP resolution. If I use medium JPEG quality for the most part, will using high quality lenses like Canon L series really matter or would I have be to shooting in Raw with medium to high resolution? I'm thinking about investing in some righteous lenses (hopefully they'll be used for 20 years or so) and just want to be sure I'm spending my money wisely.

Thanks in advance!

I'd anticipate a Canon mount change before 20 years, and being left high and dry for what? The third or fourth time?

 

[Mike K]

I've got a Canon 60D, 18MP resolution. If I use medium JPEG quality for the most part, will using high quality lenses like Canon L series really matter or would I have be to shooting in Raw with medium to high resolution? I'm thinking about investing in some righteous lenses (hopefully they'll be used for 20 years or so) and just want to be sure I'm spending my money wisely.

Thanks in advance!

I'd anticipate a Canon mount change before 20 years, and being left high and dry for what? The third or fourth time?

And the alternative would be, what? Go Nikon?

 

[manaheim]

I've got a Canon 60D, 18MP resolution. If I use medium JPEG quality for the most part, will using high quality lenses like Canon L series really matter or would I have be to shooting in Raw with medium to high resolution? I'm thinking about investing in some righteous lenses (hopefully they'll be used for 20 years or so) and just want to be sure I'm spending my money wisely.

Thanks in advance!

A higher quality lens will make a difference in your pictures no matter what the resolution.

 

[manaheim]

And yes, go Nikon.

 

[reedshots]

If you spend the money on L glass it will make a difference in you images, but if you are shooting medium JPEG images you are already degrading your IQ. L glass will give you the best results with 18MP RAW anything else is a waste

 

[clanthar]

Stop shooting medium quality JPEG -- and keep the Canon.

 

[Mike K]

Stop shooting medium quality JPEG -- and keep the Canon.

Thank you and everyone for their input.

OK, so Raw is the only way to go? I'm actually shooting Medium (size) Fine (quality) JPEG.

 

[manaheim]

If you spend the money on L glass it will make a difference in you images, but if you are shooting medium JPEG images you are already degrading your IQ. L glass will give you the best results with 18MP RAW anything else is a waste

I'm using Nikon gold-ring lenses on a 12MP camera... is it a waste?

 

[manaheim]

Stop shooting medium quality JPEG -- and keep the Canon.

Thank you and everyone for their input.

OK, so Raw is the only way to go? I'm actually shooting Medium (size) Fine (quality) JPEG.

Calling anything a waste in summary fashion is not really addressing the topic effectively.

If you're running a high-MP camera it seems a bit wasteful to not run full resolution, but then... really... the MP doesn't make the image... but then it's damned handy to have when you have an image that is just SO great, or one you need to crop a lot out of.

RAW is certainly the way I do things, but I like having a "digital negative" and I don't like to let my camera do my processing for me... and JPEGs are a lossy compression format, so whatever information isn't being presented to you is GONE. No chance for major changes. BUT RAW is also a lot more work, and a big committment to working each image individually, and some people don't want to deal with that.

It's a choice you need to make.

 

[reedshots]

I will alter my statement a bit then, if you are spending large amounts of money for L glass (high quality) lenses and only shooting what is already a low quality (in camera JPEG) image. IMO this would be a waste of the potential of the L glass and camera.

 

[Stradawhovious]

I'm using Nikon gold-ring lenses on a 12MP camera... is it a waste?

Yes. Please send them to me, so I can give them the 16mp they deserve.

 

[mjhoward]

Setting your camera to record lower resolution photos (Medium instead of Large) does not make the physical pixels any larger... if this is what you're asking. Therefore, the lens will have to be able to resolve the same size element regardless of what you have it set to.

 

[clanthar]

Stop shooting medium quality JPEG -- and keep the Canon.

Thank you and everyone for their input.

OK, so Raw is the only way to go? I'm actually shooting Medium (size) Fine (quality) JPEG.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I thought when you said medium you meant medium quality JPEGs. If you're going to shoot JPEGs then by all means FINE quality is critical. Size isn't such a big deal.

If you want to shoot JPEG instead of RAW I guess that's OK, but it's so much more work. Just getting the WB set every time you shoot seems too much trouble for me. And then there's all the extra editing to correct for the camera's image processing errors. I gotta admit I'm lazy so I shoot RAW.

Joe

 

[KmH]

At the Medium quality setting you are only using about 8 MP of the 18 MP your camera has (page 85 of the 60D user's manual).

As mentioned JPEG is a lossy, compressed image file format. At the medium quality setting the compression factor is about 1:8. Because of the way JPEG does compression, about 90% of the image color data the image sensor records is thrown out in the compression process.

Be that as it may, using L glass will still make your images look better than they do if you don't use L glass, but by shooting JPEG at medium quality, resolution is moot and you are paying a heavy price, image quality wise, by choosing JPEG Medium in the first place.

Put another way, why buy an 18 MP camera to only use 44% of the available MP (8 MP).