big enlargement, is Ken right?

D

Dave Pickett

Messages
992
Name
Dave Pickett
Edit My Images
Yes
Well I finally managed to take a set of decent images which filled the frame:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=227419

so I thought I would get some BIG enlargements, something I'd not done before. biggest being A4....

Decided on a3, but photobox had a half price offer on A2 so went for those. Ken Rockwell maintains that 6mp is enough for virtually any size print, so with my S5 pro at 12mp (or 6mp depending on your view) it should be fine......

anyway they arrived yesterday and.....

- There is no evidence of pixelisation
- They are very impressive
- There is some sign of softness from the lens at the edges, (not visible at A4), only really if you pixel peep, not obvious at any decent viewing distance

Now I suffer from Upgradeitis just like the rest of us, and have been hankering after full frame but in all honesty if I can produce decent images at this size there isnt much wrong with cropped sensor cameras!!!!!

Its often quoted on here to spend your money on better glass and so its proven. At A2 its the lens (Sigma 10 - 20 ) revealing softness rather than the sensor/camera. That said I wont be rushing to replace the sigma, even at A2 (17" x 23") softness is only apparent if you look really hard, and I have only done 3 A2's in my 40 years of photography!

If you havnt done a print this size get one done - it will reveal any shortcomings in your technique or equipment, but its really impressive what modern cameras can produce.......

Oh and in this case I would have to say Ken is right,6mp is enough for anything........
 
A couple of years ago, I took a pet portrait for a friend and had it enlarged to 20"x30". Taken with a D60, i was impressed with the print and at how sharp it was. Awesome little piece of kit.
 
Tis right - I sent some test images last month to a local online printer, ranging from A4 up to A1...
The images were deliberately chosen from a range of file sizes from different cameras I've used over the years, from my current D3 and D3x going back to the D1x.
Files ranged from 18mb to 1.1mb.
Only with the D1x can any difference be seen on the A1 prints - none at all (apart from colour differences - the D1x shots have a distinctive 'look' to them) on A4.

I also sent some of the cropped images I send to newspapers - 12" along the long side @ 150dpi.
All printed at A3 with no discernable loss of quality across the range.

My conclusion?
That I wasted £5k on a D3x when the D3 is better than adequate for almost all my work with the exception of large group shots.
 
I'll see your A2 and raise you...

I had a shot used in advertising a competition I was placed in, on a huge video display board in Manchester. Looked great to me at 7 stories high

display.jpg
 
I've had prints 24" from the D2Hs - 4.1 megapixels - fantastic - as long as the glass on the front is good you'll have no problems. A lot of the megapixel stuff is just to sell new cameras!
 
I would have thought this was well known in the photographic circles, i.e. that added number of pixels above a certain threshold wont affect/improve a print dramatically.

So, when I read that people wasted money on upgrades because there's no visible difference in the print I get slightly confused. Surely people don't upgrade because of the potential for the printed result? I would have thought people upgrade for better low-light performance, higher FPS, better AF, and whatnot.

At least that's my reasons for upgrading. I have only upgraded twice during my photographic journey: Sony compact -> Canon 20D -> Canon 5Dmk2. Each upgrade has been carefully thought through for what the camera can do, and how it fits my needs / wants.

For printing, they've all produced good results.

Also, I'm just on my first cup of coffee for the day - so pardon my slight rant. H-hrm.
 
Dave Pickett said:
I thought I would get some BIG enlargements, something I'd not done before. biggest being A4....
Click to expand...

Dave Pickett said:
I have only done 3 A2's in my 40 years of photography!
Click to expand...

Come on, make your mind up!! :lol:

If I upgrade either or both of my 40D's, then I have a huge hike in MP's which I really don't want....the potential size of a 5D mk2 TIFF file scares the crap out of me!!

I've never printed anything bigger than A4 with my 40D, but I've printed 6x9's from very heavy crops with no problems at all :thumbs:
 
I've had a several prints done up to A3 and 16"x12" size and honestly cannot tell the difference between the ones taken on my 6Mp camera and my 14Mp camera. To me this is the true test of image quality: take a look at a reasonable sized print and judge if it looks good rather than pixel peep on a screen.

The only benefit higher Mp cameras have is when I've botched the composition as I get the ability to crop tighter and still maintain a good enough quality image to print large. I know that's just papering over my inadequacies, but I'm grateful for it nonetheless!
 
Dave Pickett said:
Now I suffer from Upgradeitis just like the rest of us, and have been hankering after full frame but in all honesty if I can produce decent images at this size there isnt much wrong with cropped sensor cameras!!!!!
Click to expand...
The only 'problem' I've been able to imagine is that from having less choice over high quality wide angle lenses with a DX sensor body than an FX.

And even that is way less of an issue than it was 5 years ago.
 
I think 10-12MP is perfectly fine for almost any occasion. Enough that you can crop a little and still get good prints. It also has the advantage of less filespace taken up.

In theory there should also be less noise due to the pixel size being larger. Why can't they make a 12-15MP 7D, would be very good!
 
What resolution do commercial print companies use on their printers 150dpi/200dpi?

I did an A3 with my D1x and was pleasantly surprised at the quality.
 
I think you're right.

The only large images I've had printed were of some cakes for advertising posters for work - 4 images on an A0 poster (so that's 4 @ A2 if I'm right in my thinking) all shot on the 40D and all looked great.
Looking forward to the book I'm doing for my sister of her wedding - comparatively tiny at 12" square.
 
I'd have to agree. I once scaled up a 2.6 megapixel crop and had it printed at 60x40cm (about A2) and the results were pretty good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top