View Poll Results: Would you choose more megapixels or better dynamic range?

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • Megapixels! The more the merrier!!!

    3 4.00%
  • Dynamic Range! Picture quality is No. 1!!!

    72 96.00%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: More megapixels vs. better dynamic range

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default More megapixels vs. better dynamic range

    following the announcement of Fuji's 2 new Super CCD technologies from this thread (the Super Dynamic Range or SR sensor, and the High Resolution sensor, or HR), i got thinking - what if i were given a choice to pick between better dynamic range or more megapixels in a digicam (no particular brand)? e.g. say a 3-megapixel with improved dynamic range or 6 megapixels (can produce bigger prints)...

    just wondering what others think, so pick your option and if you want, state your reasoning and logic below.
    Last edited by Larry; 23rd January 2003 at 03:19 PM.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Johore Bahru, Malaysia
    Posts
    324

    Default

    Definately dynamic range comes 1st!~!!!

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Definitely dynamic range. We can never get enough of it, whether on film or digital. Once we have a comfortable resolution (e.g. 6mp), don't really need more unless you are printing BIG or doing severe cropping.

    Regards
    CK

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    surprisingly I am comfy with 2mp... more means can crop but that's it.
    I rather hate the blown out highlights and ISO noise...
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Please Forgive me for saying this. To me, Both are losers if you are talking about DSLR.

    I would say getting to Full Frame is more important for me. I can do interpolation, all sort of stuff to get the dynamic range and file size from the RAW files. But, there is no way to squeeze more detail into the picture if my 28mm lens can give me only the coverage of a 45mm lens on a D60. Its a nightmare if you wanted to work with wide angle pictures for DSLR without spending $$$$$ on a 1DS. You'll need at least a huge 17mm lens on the D60 to get the normal SLR 28mm(75 degrees) coverage.

    However, even if they charges $1K more for a new D60 full frame DSLR, I would buy it right away. I wouldn't even care if it has >6M pixels or 2 extra stop D Range. In anyway, if you like wide angles, you'll save on buying those white elephant lenses (17-35mm). Therefore, my primary concern is when they can reach the full frame standard. Then I'll reconsider about the bells and whistle on the CCD.
    Last edited by jasonpgc; 23rd January 2003 at 06:13 PM.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by jasonpgc
    Forgive me. To me, Both are losers.

    I would say Full Frame is more important for me. I can do interpolation, all sort of stuff to get the dynamic range and file size from the RAW files. But, there is no way to squeeze more detail into the picture if my 28mm lens can give me only the coverage of a 45mm lens on a D60. Its a nightmare if you wanted to work with wide angle pictures for DSLR without spending $$$$$ on a 1DS. You'll need at least a huge 17mm lens on the D60 to get the normal SLR 28mm(75 degrees) coverage.

    However, even if they charges $1K more for a new D60 full frame DSLR, I would buy it right away. I wouldn't even care if it has >6M pixels or 2 extra stop D Range. In anyway, if you like wide angles, you'll save on buying those white elephant lenses (17-35mm). Therefore, my primary concern is when they can reach the full frame standard. Then I'll reconsider about the bells and whistle on the CCD.
    Your solution is simple. Migrate over to the other camp and you have the equivalent of 18-36mm available to you. With the advent of the new DX lenses, FF isn't important anymore.

    Regards
    CK

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Facing the little Island Ubin
    Posts
    404

    Default

    me still new wat is mean by better dynamic range??
    isisit like frequency?

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    Your solution is simple. Migrate over to the other camp and you have the equivalent of 18-36mm available to you. With the advent of the new DX lenses, FF isn't important anymore.

    Regards
    CK
    I would have to sell my lenses and SLR cheaply if I were to do so. That will really BREAK my heart :<

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    Your solution is simple. Migrate over to the other camp and you have the equivalent of 18-36mm available to you. With the advent of the new DX lenses, FF isn't important anymore.

    Regards
    CK
    Wrong answer! Use stitch! How wide do you want? Oh yeah, u got a 360 degree fisheye withou distortion. Enough?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by jasonpgc


    I would have to sell my lenses and SLR cheaply if I were to do so. That will really BREAK my heart :<
    D60s are so rare now that you can probably sell it for $3k or a bit more?


    Regards
    CK

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    Originally posted by jasonpgc
    ...my primary concern is when they can reach the full frame standard. Then I'll reconsider about the bells and whistle on the CCD.
    one word for you my fren... 1Ds

    anyway, i see your point jasonpgc, but that's not really the point of this exercise. there's certainly a lot more things we all wish for in a DSLR. ok, for the sake of simplicity, take it as i'm offering you 2 options (theoratical only ah) - a full-frame D60 with better dynamic range but 3MP, and a full-frame D60 with say, 9MP but dynamic range not as good (ignore all other considerations like price, file size, performance, handling, etc etc). which one would you pick?

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by tomshen

    Wrong answer! Use stitch! How wide do you want? Oh yeah, u got a 360 degree fisheye withou distortion. Enough?
    Works very well for landscapes. Doesn't work that well if your scene has moving objects.

    And of coz, the side effect of stitching is that it also increases your image resolution. A 16 image panoramic shot taken with a D60 is then effectively 64 megapixels assuming a 1/3 overlap between images. That's almost 6 times the resolution of a 1Ds.

    Regards
    CK

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Originally posted by Larry
    one word for you my fren... 1Ds

    anyway, i see your point jasonpgc, but that's not really the point of this exercise. there's certainly a lot more things we all wish for in a DSLR. ok, for the sake of simplicity, take it as i'm offering you 2 options (theoratical only ah) - a full-frame D60 with better dynamic range but 3MP, and a full-frame D60 with say, 9MP but dynamic range not as good (ignore all other considerations like price, file size, performance, handling, etc etc). which one would you pick?
    This is a good one. If this is the case...

    I would pick full-frame D60 with say, 9MP but dynamic range not as good. Reason is that I can always do a exposure bracket if I need the D range. I can do whatever blending needed to get the highlights and shadow into the picture if required. However, I really would love to have the 9MP to produce 8R prints without interpolation.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by jasonpgc


    This is a good one. If this is the case...

    I would pick full-frame D60 with say, 9MP but dynamic range not as good. Reason is that I can always do a exposure bracket if I need the D range. I can do whatever blending needed to get the highlights and shadow into the picture if required. However, I really would love to have the 9MP to produce 8R prints without interpolation.
    2 megapixel can already produce good 8R.
    3 megapixel can produce very good 8R.

    Dynamic range cannot be obtained by exposure bracketing. And you can't do blending in all situations, and it requires a tripod too.

    Regards
    CK

  15. #15

    Default

    I want better dynamic range and the 1.4-1.7x multiplier.

    If its a 2x multiplier, a 70-200 can let me reach till 400mm equiv! And I can still use 1/200 and produce nice sharp pics!

    Wide angle? ..... Forget it! If landscape, stitch. If not, get film camera. Bleh. Don't care.

  16. #16

    Default

    Originally posted by Zoomer

    If its a 2x multiplier, a 70-200 can let me reach till 400mm equiv! And I can still use 1/200 and produce nice sharp pics!

    I prefer a full frame sensor with pixel density equivalent to that of the D60. 1Ds isn't there yet. Then I effectively have a 1.6x multiplier (with d60 quality images) simply by cropping the pic

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    so from this brief spat we can see those landscape photogs and nature photogs have very diff wants... no wonder Canon is rumoured to be making 2 cameras...
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  18. #18
    Member Knighthunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Pigeon Hole in Mandalay
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Dynamic Range is better, my experience with my DSLR prevent me to use high ISO due to increase in noise level. I want sensor with ISO 1000 noiseless, dun't care is FF or HF...resolution minimum is 3mp for decent 4R print.
    W204FL

  19. #19

    Default

    Originally posted by erwinx



    I prefer a full frame sensor with pixel density equivalent to that of the D60. 1Ds isn't there yet. Then I effectively have a 1.6x multiplier (with d60 quality images) simply by cropping the pic
    Yes, I know that you can do that. But you paid for a large full frame sensor. A bit of a waste.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang


    2 megapixel can already produce good 8R.
    3 megapixel can produce very good 8R.

    Dynamic range cannot be obtained by exposure bracketing. And you can't do blending in all situations, and it requires a tripod too.

    Regards
    CK
    Without interpolation....

    To produce a 4R at 300 Dpi, you'll need at least 1200*1800=2.16 megapixels.

    To produce a 8Rs at 300 Dpi, you'll need at least 2400*3600=8.64 megapixels.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •