For less than $4,000 you can get an absolutely crazy amount of megapixels, and still have less dynamic range than a Nikon D800.
This doesn't make sense to me. I'd be perfectly happy with 20-30 MP and increased dynamic range. It'll be interesting to see how these work out in the field, and how it steers the market.
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/canon-blasts-50-megapixel-full-frame-dslr-brand-new-flagship-rebels/
This doesn't make sense to me. I'd be perfectly happy with 20-30 MP and increased dynamic range. It'll be interesting to see how these work out in the field, and how it steers the market.
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/canon-blasts-50-megapixel-full-frame-dslr-brand-new-flagship-rebels/
no subject
Date: 2015-02-09 01:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-02-10 01:16 pm (UTC)I really want to do this some day.
Though considering some of the cameras that they've developed that theoretically allow you to recompose the shot after exposure, that's pretty close to infinity.
no subject
Date: 2015-02-09 01:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-02-10 01:18 pm (UTC)It's not unlike the pixel count on smartphones. Yes, it's huge, but it's also a crazy small sensor and isn't going to produce very impressive 20x30 enlargements.
no subject
Date: 2015-02-10 10:15 pm (UTC)I do wonder if Nikon will be deploying Fresnel elements in a future version of their 200-400mm f/4 - that led to their new version of the 300 halving in weight, despite the addition of stabilization. Not that I'd be able to afford it, but I wouldn't mind a lens to aim for. =:)
no subject
Date: 2015-02-11 02:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-02-11 05:17 pm (UTC)Thankfully, the Nikkor 300mm f/4D AF-S is remarkably sharp - indeed, I usually use a 1.4x TC with it, and even on the D7100's 24MP sensor, the results remain delightfully sharp. The TC17E-II, though, feels like it pushes things just a little too far, so it's going up for sale - a perfectly good TC, but better suited to full frame usage.
Still, I dare say there'll be some for whom 50MP actually does make sense, though I'm struggling to come up with many justifications. =:) I suppose I could assemble a high resolution panorama with fewer exposures, and thus, in less time - there was one city pano I took that wound up being composed of north of 700 shots. ^_^
no subject
Date: 2015-02-11 08:54 pm (UTC)Myself, I don't have any SSDs, but they're getting down to the price per gig level that they seem increasingly viable.