Resolution matters?

Messages
4,999
Name
Neil
Edit My Images
No
Just a quickie, I own a D610 and have been thinking about trading it in for a used D800 given its superior build, weather proofing, etc, and also because the resolution of the 36mp sensor appears to produce breathtakingly detailed image. Am I right to assume that the extra resolution really does matter?
 
It really depends on what you are going to do with the images

If you are going to print big or crop in then the extra mp could be of use.

Have you found yourself needing a higher resolution when working on images you've taken with the D610?
 
I had a D600 before I made my move to the D800 and only did so because I kept getting the oil spot issues...

Anyway the extra res of the D800 is both a blessing and a curse, as Matt says the 36mp is great if your printing huge but I made large prints from the D600 also and for normal sizes (up to A2) I can't see much of a difference.
The 36mp files can be a pain sometimes due to pure file size v the 24mp files of the D600 as well.

Depends what type of shooting you do as well, as you say the D800 is much better built, its tank like and weather proof and I love it for landscape shooting, also consider though that it weights a good but more than the D610, I certainly notice the extra heft over my old D600.
 
It really depends on what you are going to do with the images

If you are going to print big or crop in then the extra mp could be of use.

Have you found yourself needing a higher resolution when working on images you've taken with the D610?

Not really, I just like the extra detail it seems to produce over the 610.
 
Not really, I just like the extra detail it seems to produce over the 610.
So when are you going to see the extra resolution....certainly not when viewing on a 'normal' monitor or printing at 'normal' sizes. How many lenses do you have that can provide the resolution for the sensor to record?

Bob
 
So when are you going to see the extra resolution....certainly not when viewing on a 'normal' monitor or printing at 'normal' sizes. How many lenses do you have that can provide the resolution for the sensor to record?

Bob

Moving to a higher res sensor will give higher res images for any given lens irrespective of quality. No lens will allow full 36MP res images, probably more like 24 but then as you say, this is probably not noticeable under normal conditions.

Another thing to consider is that the higher MP rating leads to potentially more blur through camera shake or subject movement - there is more likelihood of slight subject movement crossing two pixels reducing overall resolution, unless on a tripod of course.
 
I am not sure that "resolution matters" once you have 16mp's + for most of us

I'd be very happy with a D4S ........ the D700 is good and the D750 very good ...... but I don't print mega sized "murals" to put on the wall

depends how much very fine detail you want ........ look at the images from the Sigma DP3M ...... but it's only good at ISO100 and maybe ISO200

High ISO performance and noise control are more important to me ........ which depends on how much you crop

You may find (generally) 36mps to be more noisy than 24mps ........ depending on the image
 
Last edited:
Moving to a higher res sensor will give higher res images for any given lens irrespective of quality.....
I don't disagree with that statement, Mark, but Neil has stated that he's unlikely to crop or print large therefore the image resolution will be reduced again for viewing (based on normal monitors and printers) and I doubt whether 36Mp will have any more perceivable detail than 24Mp.

Bob
 
Interestingly I use a D800e & for me there is a night & day difference between my 24mp D7100 & my 36mp D800e in the studio, let alone shadow detail for landscapes outside.
I do notice blur more often - even shooting at double shutter speed / focal length.

And to see the 'extra resolution' , either crop in more or just get a bigger screen - lol
 
And to see the 'extra resolution' , either crop in more or just get a bigger screen - lol
I wonder how long it will be before we're using 36 megapixel monitors? With current monitor technology (~100 dpi) 36 megapixels would require a 90" monitor. I saw a 90" TV in John Lewis the other day and let's just say it wouldn't be terribly ergonomic to use...
 
The D800 can show up any deficiencies, in lenses, technique, all sorts of things (possibly why I didn't use mine much!) while the D750 seems to let me get away with more a pedestrian lens line up and still lets me crop a bit and print up to A3+. IF you really NEED the extra croppability that the D8x0 allows, you need it but for most uses the D750 is plenty camera enough.
 
The D800 can show up any deficiencies, in lenses, technique, all sorts of things....
I've heard a lot of people say this, and I don't understand it. Every single one of Nikon's current DX bodies has smaller pixels than the D800. So why is the D800 so uniquely unforgiving?
 
It can only show up more deficiencies if you zoom in more. i.e. 1:1 pixel resolution with the monitor. With identically sized prints, it shouldn't.

If you compare images taken with, e.g. a 12MP camera and a 36MP camera and the lens can resolve greater than the 12MP sensor but not as well as the 36MP sensor, then the image from the 36MP camera will be better than that from the 12MP camera as the weak link in that case is the lens. It can't get worse because the camera has better resolution.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
It can only show up more deficiencies if you zoom in more. i.e. 1:1 pixel resolution with the monitor. With identically sized prints, it shouldn't.

Yup. This is it, people look veeeeeerrrry closely and see slightly nasty things they couldn't see before. Stop looking very closely and all is sweetness and light again :D
 
I've heard a lot of people say this, and I don't understand it. Every single one of Nikon's current DX bodies has smaller pixels than the D800. So why is the D800 so uniquely unforgiving?
I don`t know the technicalities Stewart, but the D800 is very unforgiving on lenses and technique, it just really shows flaws in either or even both. The D750 is far more forgiving.

I always have to increase my shutter speed if hand holding a long lens on the 800 over the 750.

Why that is so, I haven`t a scooby.
 
Like Ade said, not sure why but it seems to be the case! Possibly why I never really got on with mine so hardly used it - almost every shot seemed soft, even without pixel peeping. Since my reason for buying it was to be able to crop in quite severely and still print big, the softness that so doing caused meant that it tended to stay at home. The D750 still allows some cropping and big prints and the 1 series and FT-1 adaptor give me (a lot of!) extra reach when I need it.
 
If you compare images taken with, e.g. a 12MP camera and a 36MP camera and the lens can resolve greater than the 12MP sensor but not as well as the 36MP sensor, then the image from the 36MP camera will be better than that from the 12MP camera as the weak link in that case is the lens. It can't get worse because the camera has better resolution.
But that's my point exactly. If you compare a 24MP DX camera with a D800 in DX crop mode, the D800 only has 16MP. So it's the DX camera which has greater resolution, better image quality, and is presumably more demanding in terms of technique.
 
Back
Top