12MP, if not cropping, Enough for Most Average Photography Needs?

[projectwoofer]

50 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

One thing is for sure to me. I mean no offense. I just don´t see a way to enjoy the first video you posted. 🙂 @SRV1981

Sorry, friends, these hyperhyper youtubers have an unpleasant way for the rest of humanity who are none of their 500.000 subscribers.

Amen! Simply unbearable. Those are channels that I wouldn’t watch even if you paid me to watch them. 

[webrunner5]

2 hours ago, androidlad said:

Low pixel count cameras tend to be cleaner at high ISO because of the lower cumulative read noise. It has nothing to do with bigger pixels collecting more light.

However, with the latest sensor design, it's doesn't alway apply any more. A1 for example, despite having 50MP, is slightly better in low light when shooting video compared to A7S III.

I say you are wrong. Lower resolution cameras have less cumulative read noise due to fewer pixels. If there are fewer pixels they are collecting more light than a equal sized high pixel one. If not true you would never have the same light gathering, so no equal ISO or aperture to say a A7r. They would have completely widely different base ISOs. And read noise is created in the Amp also. So it is not a sensor only problem, main reason the higher the ISO, ergo the more you turn up the Amp, the more read noise.

 

[TomTheDP]

You can still crop in 4k and have a nice looking photo as long as you aren't printing huge stuff. 12MP is enough for most applications.

[mkabi]

22 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

…as long as you aren't printing huge stuff…

I have a strong feeling that most people have been tricked to think that way by the pixel peepers who need to zoom in 400 to 800%
1080p was good enough on my old 60 incher… and you have to remember 1080p is only 2MP.

Even if you’re talking billboard size… nobody is walking up to a billboard on the regular. Most of the billboards I see are off of highways… I see one moving at the speed of 60 to 80 miles per hour 1 mile away and that’s if I’m not concentrating on the road/traffic ahead of me. Where is the logic here??? “Oh… I see jagged edges on that Billboard… did he take picture on the first iPhone or something???” All that while driving too???

[IronFilm]

33 minutes ago, mkabi said:

Even if you’re talking billboard size… nobody is walking up to a billboard on the regular. Most of the billboards I see are off of highways… I see one moving at the speed of 60 to 80 miles per hour 1 mile away and that’s if I’m not concentrating on the road/traffic ahead of me. Where is the logic here??? “Oh… I see jagged edges on that Billboard… did he take picture on the first iPhone or something???” All that while driving too???

Remember the Nikon D1X (over two decades old!!!) is "only" 6 megapixels and a hell of a lot of billboards got shot with the D1X back in the day!

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond1x 

[webrunner5]

Most 1080p Cine cameras, the Sony F3, Canon C100, Panny Af100, etc. only had sensors of say 3.5mp or less. It is pretty amazing how little you need for video.

[webrunner5]

First Digital camera I ever owned was a Sony Mavica and I think they were a 1/2mp. It was pretty damn good believe it or not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Mavica#/media/File:Sony_Mavica_FD5_4040.jpg

[androidlad]

9 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I say you are wrong. Lower resolution cameras have less cumulative read noise due to fewer pixels. If there are fewer pixels they are collecting more light than a equal sized high pixel one. If not true you would never have the same light gathering, so no equal ISO or aperture to say a A7r. They would have completely widely different base ISOs. And read noise is created in the Amp also. So it is not a sensor only problem, main reason the higher the ISO, ergo the more you turn up the Amp, the more read noise.

 

Please eduate yourself: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/7940373140/dpreview-tv-why-lower-resolution-sensors-are-not-better-in-low-light

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, androidlad said:

Please eduate yourself: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/7940373140/dpreview-tv-why-lower-resolution-sensors-are-not-better-in-low-light

That article is pure bullshit. I would not trust DPR to tell me how to change a battery in a camera. If you base your knowledge on that article well I don't know what to say. I base it on being in this business for over 40 years and having done a lot of things in it and with it.

[webrunner5]

Not counting owning a Sony A7s and a A7s mk II, and a A7 mk II, and a A7r, and a A7r mk II. I think I might have a little insight on how all of them worked. YMMV.

[webrunner5]

But I respect your opinions on here, I know you go to a lot of work on sensors for our information. We are probably, maybe each half right. That way it makes us even. Heck, I don't know, but we are lucky to have what we have.

All I know is what I have experienced over a lot of years and a lot of research myself. But I am no engineer.

[SRV1981]

So for low noise and high ISO shooting what’s the science in that?  Many are pushing the a7iv over a7siii/fx3 but the latter has dual iso at 12,800 vs 3200 - which seems more useful. Just slap on an ND and you’ll have more flexibility in lower lit situations without lighting on the a7siii over a7iv. 

[Django]

@androidlad wasn't it revealed A7S3 actually uses a 48MP quad bayer sensor binned down to 12MP? That would explain the increased read noise and performance similar to A1.

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/surprise-the-sony-a7siii-actually-has-a-48-megapixel-quad-bayer-sensor/

 

On 6/5/2022 at 6:59 PM, MrSMW said:

A lot of folks poo poo the Canon R6 for photography stating "it's only 20mp" but I could easily do all my work with that.

Yup, I've done many photography events including two weddings with R6 no problem. It uses the same sensor than 1DX3.

[androidlad]

6 hours ago, Django said:

@androidlad wasn't it revealed A7S3 actually uses a 48MP quad bayer sensor binned down to 12MP? That would explain the increased read noise and performance similar to A1.

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/surprise-the-sony-a7siii-actually-has-a-48-megapixel-quad-bayer-sensor/

 

Yup, I've done many photography events including two weddings with R6 no problem. It uses the same sensor than 1DX3.

Pixel binning reduces read noise (1 readout instead of 4), hence those 100MP+ smartphone sensors output 12MP in lowlight.

It's essentially used as a locked down 12MP sensor.

[androidlad]

6 hours ago, Django said:

@androidlad wasn't it revealed A7S3 actually uses a 48MP quad bayer sensor binned down to 12MP? That would explain the increased read noise and performance similar to A1.

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/surprise-the-sony-a7siii-actually-has-a-48-megapixel-quad-bayer-sensor/

 

Yup, I've done many photography events including two weddings with R6 no problem. It uses the same sensor than 1DX3.

Pixel binning reduces read noise (1 readout instead of 4), hence those 100MP+ smartphone sensors output 12MP in lowlight. A7S3 essentially uses it as a locked down 12MP sensor.

In other words, it performs just as good as same-gen higher pixel FF sensor in A1, there's no longer a need to sacrifice pixel count for low light performance.

But if you compare it to A7S2 or original A7S, the noise performance at lower ISO did get worse, because the higher readout speed requires multiple parallel ADCs and this slightly increases read noise. But at higher ISO they share negligible difference.

[John Matthews]

Most of you have already seen this, but I'll post it again. Yedlin makes compelling points.

Here are my thoughts:

If you're under 30, you want resolution because of specs. If you're over 30, you want resolution because you were somehow traumatized by SD. In reality, 1080p is just fine. 🙂

 

[projectwoofer]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Most of you have already seen this, but I'll post it again. Yedlin makes compelling points.

Here are my thoughts:

If you're under 30, you want resolution because of specs. If you're over 30, you want resolution because you were somehow traumatized by SD. In reality, 1080p is just fine. 🙂

 

If we’re talking about video, it certainly doesn’t help that most new cameras have awful 1080p quality. Only solution is to just shoot in 4K. Though my S5’s live crop mode has fantastic 1080p quality albeit only in 30fps. It puzzles me why the normal FHD modes are so bad on most cameras manufactured in the last few years.

[SRV1981]

2 hours ago, androidlad said:

Pixel binning reduces read noise (1 readout instead of 4), hence those 100MP+ smartphone sensors output 12MP in lowlight. A7S3 essentially uses it as a locked down 12MP sensor.

In other words, it performs just as good as same-gen higher pixel FF sensor in A1, there's no longer a need to sacrifice pixel count for low light performance.

But if you compare it to A7S2 or original A7S, the noise performance at lower ISO did get worse, because the higher readout speed requires multiple parallel ADCs and this slightly increases read noise. But at higher ISO they share negligible difference.

That is fascinating.  It makes me think of some debates I've seen as to whether or not the a7iv is a better lowlight camera than the a7sIII due to hits 7k downsampled to 4k readout that creates finer noise.  Any thoughts on the validity of this?  Part of me feels that the a7siii at 12,800 (second native iso) is better than the a7iv at 3200 (second native iso) but unsure if that is in fact true or why that would be?

[BTM_Pix]

6 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Part of me feels that the a7siii at 12,800 (second native iso) is better than the a7iv at 3200 (second native iso) but unsure if that is in fact true or why that would be?

Go to the DPReview studio shot comparison page, select those (or any) cameras at those (or any) ISOs, download the files and make your own mind up.

[SRV1981]

22 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Go to the DPReview studio shot comparison page, select those (or any) cameras at those (or any) ISOs, download the files and make your own mind up.

Thanks just tried it! The image they shit for a7s iii is way smaller but also that is photo not video - would there be a difference. I don’t feel confident deciphering which of the two has better noise producing or a cleaner image