- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
That's what I thought when I moved up to a 24MP APS-C sensor, which has smaller more densely packed pixels than a full frame 44MP sensor, so is even less forgiving of lens defects, more likely to hit the much discussed problem of the sensor "outresolving" the lenses and showing up unpleasant crap that 14MP simply hadn't been able to pick up.
Yes.
My two worst lenses from a detail resolution point of view were my 18-250mm general purpose zoom and my ancient but usefully tiny film era 35-70mm f4 zoom. The first surprise was that contrary to much of what I'd read in photography forums they didn't look any worse. Of course at a pixel level their lack of detail resolution was more obvious, but at any particular size of print or screen magnification they didn't actually look any worse than they had on a 14MP sensor.
Yes. It's quite wrong to suggest that more pixels will somehow make lenses look worse. In fact, they will always looks slightly better, at least in theory - see below.
The second surprise was that despite the fact that at 14MP both lenses were quite definitely soft and lacking in the detail resolution that good primes could produce, at 24MP they actually managed to show a little more detail resolution. The improvement was much less obvious than the improvement I got from my sharpest lenses, but it was still an improvement.
And in practise too