More Megapixels?

[robbins.photo]

I would imagine that a lot of other things play into the decision to use the 16 mp sensor for a D4, including shooting speed/buffer size, etc. That and I think it was originally released somewhere back in 2012, not sure where their standard sensor lineup was at that time but that might have also had something to do with it. Not really an expert on Nikon history of course, but there's a lot of stuff packed into the D4 to justify that price, it's not all just the sensor.

 

[ruifo]

I am pretty happy with my 24MP camera, that's for sure

 

[robbins.photo]

I am pretty happy with my 24MP camera, that's for sure

Loved mine so much I bought a 2nd one.. lol

 

[hamlet]

I always thought that more megapixels meant more detail. Kind of like a mozaik, the more little colored glass you've got the more detailed it looks. That's always been my interpretation of it, don't know if i'm right on this or not?

 

[slackercruster]

OP...unless you making big prints it is not a big differnce usually.

You can see for yoursel here. Tests of 6mp to 40mp

Camera Comparisons

 

[Braineack]

OP...unless you making big prints it is not a big differnce usually.

You can see for yoursel here. Tests of 6mp to 40mp

Camera Comparisons

There's a clear advantage between 6MP and 12MP. Even when comparing the 40MP camera with teh 18 and 24MP ones tested, the advantage is clear.

 

[cgw]

OP...unless you making big prints it is not a big differnce usually.

You can see for yoursel here. Tests of 6mp to 40mp

Camera Comparisons

There's a clear advantage between 6MP and 12MP. Even when comparing the 40MP camera with teh 18 and 24MP ones tested, the advantage is clear.

Hmmm, so I guess the Sony engineers really screwed the pooch with the FF A7s, right? Only 12.2mp! What were they thinking?

 

[Derrel]

OP...unless you making big prints it is not a big differnce usually.

You can see for yoursel here. Tests of 6mp to 40mp

Camera Comparisons

There's a clear advantage between 6MP and 12MP. Even when comparing the 40MP camera with teh 18 and 24MP ones tested, the advantage is clear.

Hmmm, so I guess the Sony engineers really screwed the pooch with the FF A7s, right? Only 12.2mp! What were they thinking?

From what I have read about the A7s from the fellow hired by Sony to create their launch videos for the A7s, the A7s is highly optimized for videography...he shot some AMAZINGLY detailed, night-time footage using the A7s in Scotland in a small fishing village, where the local fishermen catch haddock offshore, and a local fellow smokes fish in their tradional way by digging a hole in the ground, then lining it with half of an old, used whisky-aging barrel, and builds a fire in that and smokes the fish on a nearby rack system...somewhat similar to traditional fish-smoking processes used by multiple tribal cultures. Video frames don't need an especially high MP count to look good...the resolution of most screens or projection systems really is not that high, and the images are fleeting.

I wonder if this new sensor also shoots only 11-bit RAW images? Not that anybody cares...

 

[Braineack]

OP...unless you making big prints it is not a big differnce usually.

You can see for yoursel here. Tests of 6mp to 40mp

Camera Comparisons

There's a clear advantage between 6MP and 12MP. Even when comparing the 40MP camera with teh 18 and 24MP ones tested, the advantage is clear.

Hmmm, so I guess the Sony engineers really screwed the pooch with the FF A7s, right? Only 12.2mp! What were they thinking?

not all MP are created equal. I was just going by the image in the link*.

Nokia 808 PureView y Pentax 645D: 40 megapíxeles frente a frente | Quesabesde

*He used to be a member here, but if you scroll down, you can see he really fell into the HDR hole. I wonder if he ever got into any of the art galleries that he sent his work out with the weirdest explanations/stories written on the back of them...

 

[Derrel]

Speaking of "more megapixels"...Pentax's new 645, the just-released model, is using a new CMOS sensor of just over 51 effective megapixels, which means the remaining 40-MP Pentax 645's are already losing retail price from the big dealers.

Pentax is undercutting the new Hasselblad and Phase systems that both use this SAME 51 MP CMOS sensor...of course, they HAVE to be priced lower...they are Pentax, not Hasselblad nor Phase.

 

[robbins.photo]

I wonder if this new sensor also shoots only 11-bit RAW images? Not that anybody cares...

I care. I care very deeply.

Hmm.. ok, no not really. You got me on that one.. lol. If Sony ever does settle down and it looks like they might actually throw some support behind one or maybe even two systems and convince me that they'll still be making them a few years from now then I'd probably give them a more serious look. As it is they are so all over the map I just couldn't even think about investing in Sony as a system, not at this stage. Well that and the EVF thing.. ick. Lol

 

[djacobox372]

Keep in mind that in order to take advantage of extra resolution your focus needs to be more accurate and your handholding more stable.

The sensor is just the last step in the process.

 

[pixmedic]

one of the biggest advantages of going from a 3100 to a 7100, in my opinion, is gaining the in body focus motor.
this lets you use autofocus with ANY of Nikons older AF or AF-D lenses. This means you can get into older pro glass a lot cheaper.

 

[robbins.photo]

Keep in mind that in order to take advantage of extra resolution your focus needs to be more accurate and your handholding more stable.

The sensor is just the last step in the process.

Oh yes, higher MP can be a double edge sword, no doubt about it. Lower quality glass that works fine on a lower MP system suddenly starts giving you more noticeable problems on higher MP. Errors in technique become more pronounced. But there are advantages too - used in combination with good glass and good technique you've got a lot more to work with when it comes time to post process, leaves you a lot more options and ultimately I think that leads to better images overall.

I shot a D5100 for quite a while and I liked the camera, but after shooting the 24 mp D5200 I couldn't switch back to a 16 mp, not at this point. I'd just miss being able to crop and resize the way I can now, and for a lot of the stuff I shoot that can be a huge advantage.

For folks that really don't do a lot of telephoto or do say more portrait work, odds are good they wouldn't see as much of an advantage going from a 16 mp to a 24 mp, other than some benefits of other sensor improvements that usually come with it like the better dynamic range and often better low light abilities.

 

[Derrel]

one of the biggest advantages of going from a 3100 to a 7100, in my opinion, is gaining the in body focus motor.
this lets you use autofocus with ANY of Nikons older AF or AF-D lenses. This means you can get into older pro glass a lot cheaper.

You know, I shot the 28-105mm f/3.5~4.5 AF-D Nikkor, a zoom made from 1998 to 2006, as part of the Lens Across America deal that 480Sparky has resurrected. We're talking about a used lens that sells for $115 or so used (clean one here in town was at $95, KEH was at like $115 for an EX condition one). And while it's not "pro" Nikon glass, I was pretty impressed with it on the D3x...LACK OF distortion at the wide-angle end was astounding...so I read K.R.'s review of it, and find it's one of the LOWEST-disortion zooms he's tried, and he has shot many,many more lenses than the 50 or so I've used.

I would NOT hesitate to use that lens to cover an event on a new, 24MP FX Nikon like a D600,D610, or a D3 or D3x, or D4, or whatever. The lens requires an in-body AF motor; it is a royal BUGGER to focus manually ay beyond the macro range, which is like 1:2 (half life-size) at 105mm in macro mode. I think it might also find some uses on a 1.5x camera as well.