In the realm of insane megapixels: Canon introduces 50MP 5Ds

[thewayne]

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/

Comments

[porsupah.livejournal.com]

One benefit affects me directly - I'm a wildlife sort, with rabbits a specialty, so the more reach, the better, given my subjects tend not to be overly fond of proximate attention. Going from the 12 megapickles of the D90 to the 24 of the D7100 effectively gave me a 1.4 TC without any optical distortion, as well as a mild sensitivity improvement. (My usual lens is the Nikkor 300mm f/4D AF-S - beautifully sharp and bright. No stabilization, but that's only rarely a consideration - I had the previous generation Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, but sold it, as I simply wasn't using it anywhere near as often, given the doubling in weight - not a small consideration for me, as I'm always handheld)

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. =:)

[cp.livejournal.com]

I do get the enhanced ability to crop and zoom, but that only takes you so far given that the sensor outresolves the optical sharpness of all but the highest-end lenses. I guess it just seems like there's a number somewhere between 24MP and 50MP where you would get the added benefits of the additional pixels while still realizing enhanced dynamic range and reduced noise, you know? I was just a little surprised to see a camera whose main selling point seems to be "Look at all the pixels!" :)

[porsupah.livejournal.com]

Oh, quite so! The D800 family's proven very popular with wildlife photographers, but for me, going full frame would mean dropping resolution modestly. 50MP on full frame would actually wind up marginally improved, but there'd be no point in it, save for relatively rare occasions - I'm always having to crop substantially, so I'd just be cutting away even more pixels.

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. ^_^

[thewayne.livejournal.com]

That is a really awesome stitch, I'm not sure if I'd have the patience to do something like that, but I'd like to try. I can see definite benefit to having an SSD for your PS scratch drive since it would be doing lots of grinding.

Myself, I don't have any SSDs, but they're getting down to the price per gig level that they seem increasingly viable.