Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 05 Sep 2016 (Monday) 11:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

best downsizing for superior IQ

 
chauncey
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,696 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Jun 2007
Location: MI/CO
     
Sep 05, 2016 11:59 |  #1

I'm still pondering a Canon 5DsR, the 50 MP beast, in search of the ultimate IQ from the camera.

It is communally accepted that downsizing a high MP image to one of a lower one will produce a
better IQ than one would achieve by using a lower MP camera.

Question is, are you better off doing it in-camera as the Canon has the ability to drop down to a
1.3 or 1.6 crop in camera or, accomplish the whole thing in Photoshop by increasing the ppi?

BTW, what happens to noise levels with either technique?


The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/c​hauncey43 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,407 posts
Likes: 170
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Sep 08, 2016 04:16 |  #2

First, cropping may make for a smaller image and a smaller file, but it doesn't affect IQ at all. Take a print, get out your scissors and cut out a section from the middle. Is that photo "better" now, or just smaller? Cropping is the same thing, whether it is done by using less of the sensor or by cropping in PS.

Second, what is IQ? Is it less noise and consequently greater DR - DR is a function of the depth of the noise floor and the ability to open shadows without making the noise objectionable. You will get this from downsasampling, but, as always, there is a trade-off; loss of resolution, I.e. fine detail. It all depends what you want to do. For a large print you will need lots of pixels. A highest quality 20x30 needs 54 Mp, a negligible upsize for the 5Ds, and a 24x36 needs 77.7 Mp - also a not very taxing upsize (20% on each side). But if you first downsize to 25 Mp to get less noise and then upsize to a 24x36 print, it will be 170% on each side - cleaner but less detailed and with the losses inherent in more extreme upsampling.

Of course, if you don't need 50Mp - prints smaller than 20x30 or display on a 5K or smaller screen - there will be some downsampling done somewhere along the line. How much benefit it provides will depend on the algorithms.

I wouldn't buy a 5Ds now unless you will be doing a lot of really huge printing. The 5D4 looks to be superior in almost every way. Better sensor module design will give around 2 stops more low ISO DR and bigger pixels will give better high ISO performance.
I


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NinetyEight
"Banned for life"
Avatar
3,188 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 22
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Dorset - England
     
Sep 08, 2016 04:26 |  #3

Chauncey - In your post you are talking about 'downsizing' and 'cropping' - These are two different things. As Elie says, cropping will not affect the image quality, but downsizing could.


Kev

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Avatar
7,550 posts
Likes: 2539
Joined Oct 2015
Location: Bourbon, Indiana - USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Bassat.
     
Sep 08, 2016 06:49 |  #4

chauncey wrote in post #18117710 (external link)
I'm still pondering a Canon 5DsR, the 50 MP beast, in search of the ultimate IQ from the camera.
...


Ultimate IQ? If that is truly what you are after, you would not be considering a Canon DSLR at all. Look at some medium format digital, or maybe someone makes an 8x10 digital. Larger sensors gather more light. Light is IQ.

I suspect you are NOT looking for ultimate IQ, but the best image quality you can afford. These most likely are two entirely different animals. For most of what most folks do with a DSLR, you'll never see the difference between an XSi and a kit lens and a 1DX with a 24-70 LII. Granted, there are exceptions. Two of the biggest exceptions are when you are REALLY pushing print size, and/or ISO. Anything less than 24"x36" and/or ISO 3200 is very unlikely to show up in prints from either system described above.

There are much better ways to improve your work than buying a high pickle-density camera. Have you mastered composition, lighting, subject choice, framing, lighting (natural and/or artificial), lens selection, exposure parameter selection, or any of the other things that go into making a photo worth looking at or sharing?

A 5DS(R) will cost you a lot of money, and do nothing to improve YOUR ability to make a nice photograph. Practicing with what you have, and trying new things (UWA/astro/sports/BIF.​..) is a lot of fun, and costs nothing. Chasing ultimate IQ is a unicorn hunt; you'll be buying every new doodad that comes down the pike. Improving your repertoire is real, fun, and attainable.

Don't buy a camera for IQ. There isn't a hill of beans difference between any two current bodies. Buy the features you need. Use them. Need 50MP? Buy a 5DS. Need 14fps? Buy a 1DX II. Need 1.6X reach in an inexpensive body? Buy a used T3i. Nobody will ever see the difference in your results.


Tom,
Film gear: Elan 7NE / Elan 7 / EOS T2
Yashica FX-D (x2) & FX-3 Super 2000 / DSB 28mm f/2.8 / 50mm ML f/2 / 135mm ML f/2.8 / Sigma Zoom-gamma II 21-35mm f/3.4.2 / Yashica ML 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 / Tokina 70-210mm ML f/4.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chauncey
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,696 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Jun 2007
Location: MI/CO
     
Sep 08, 2016 07:13 |  #5

Due to the magic of Photoshop's photomerge, image size is not a priority.
I am however, beginning to think that I'm taking my anal attitude to the extreme.


The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/c​hauncey43 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Avatar
7,550 posts
Likes: 2539
Joined Oct 2015
Location: Bourbon, Indiana - USA
     
Sep 08, 2016 07:18 |  #6

chauncey wrote in post #18120810 (external link)
Due to the magic of Photoshop's photomerge, image size is not a priority.
I am however, beginning to think that I'm taking my anal attitude to the extreme.

I can't quite decide, is that simply a statement of fact, or is it redundant? :)


Tom,
Film gear: Elan 7NE / Elan 7 / EOS T2
Yashica FX-D (x2) & FX-3 Super 2000 / DSB 28mm f/2.8 / 50mm ML f/2 / 135mm ML f/2.8 / Sigma Zoom-gamma II 21-35mm f/3.4.2 / Yashica ML 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 / Tokina 70-210mm ML f/4.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chauncey
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,696 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Jun 2007
Location: MI/CO
     
Sep 08, 2016 07:31 |  #7

is that simply a statement of fact

most likely


The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/c​hauncey43 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joedlh
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,233 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 378
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, N. America, Sol III, Orion Spur, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Cluster, Laniakea.
     
Sep 08, 2016 07:56 |  #8

chauncey wrote in post #18120810 (external link)
I am however, beginning to think that I'm taking my anal attitude to the extreme.

I think you should entertain this notion. Unless you have the visual acuity of a bald eagle. Or you're a dedicated pixel-peeper. You don't need 50mp for a 20x30 print. I've printed that large from a 10 mp 40D. In fact I had a 3x5 foot print on display at the Long Island Aquarium for years. That one came from an 8mp 20D. Human visual acuity is the controlling factor. Large prints are meant to be viewed from large distances. Unless you want to walk up to your 20x30 print and see a bug on a blade of grass that was 40 feet from your camera position. But in that case, you should have taken a shot of the bug with a macro lens.


Joe
Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now. :rolleyes:
http://photo.joedlh.ne​t (external link)
Editing ok

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Avatar
7,550 posts
Likes: 2539
Joined Oct 2015
Location: Bourbon, Indiana - USA
     
Sep 08, 2016 07:59 |  #9

joedlh wrote in post #18120858 (external link)
I think you should entertain this notion. Unless you have the visual acuity of a bald eagle. Or you're a dedicated pixel-peeper. You don't need 50mp for a 20x30 print. I've printed that large from a 10 mp 40D. In fact I had a 3x5 foot print on display at the Long Island Aquarium for years. That one came from an 8mp 20D. Human visual acuity is the controlling factor. Large prints are meant to be viewed from large distances. Unless you want to walk up to your 20x30 print and see a bug on a blade of grass that was 40 feet from your camera position. But in that case, you should have taken a shot of the bug with a macro lens.

True. But then the OP would want to see the lint on the dust on the pollen on the bugs antennae. :)


Tom,
Film gear: Elan 7NE / Elan 7 / EOS T2
Yashica FX-D (x2) & FX-3 Super 2000 / DSB 28mm f/2.8 / 50mm ML f/2 / 135mm ML f/2.8 / Sigma Zoom-gamma II 21-35mm f/3.4.2 / Yashica ML 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 / Tokina 70-210mm ML f/4.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chauncey
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,696 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 460
Joined Jun 2007
Location: MI/CO
     
Sep 08, 2016 08:07 |  #10

I once had an instructor that said if his prints weren't capable of being viewed at nose length, the weren't print material.


The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/c​hauncey43 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Avatar
7,550 posts
Likes: 2539
Joined Oct 2015
Location: Bourbon, Indiana - USA
     
Sep 08, 2016 08:18 |  #11

chauncey wrote in post #18120871 (external link)
I once had an instructor that said if his prints weren't capable of being viewed at nose length, the weren't print material.

He must have been fairly young. I can't see anything within about 3' of my face. I think my arms are shrinking. :)


Tom,
Film gear: Elan 7NE / Elan 7 / EOS T2
Yashica FX-D (x2) & FX-3 Super 2000 / DSB 28mm f/2.8 / 50mm ML f/2 / 135mm ML f/2.8 / Sigma Zoom-gamma II 21-35mm f/3.4.2 / Yashica ML 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 / Tokina 70-210mm ML f/4.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joedlh
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,233 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 378
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, N. America, Sol III, Orion Spur, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Cluster, Laniakea.
Post edited over 1 year ago by joedlh.
     
Sep 08, 2016 08:24 |  #12

chauncey wrote in post #18120871 (external link)
I once had an instructor that said if his prints weren't capable of being viewed at nose length, the weren't print material.

Knowing what I know now, I would have dropped the class. Right or wrong, I would have had him pegged as a pretentious d-bag. This was back in the film days? Maybe he was using hyperbole to emphasize the importance of getting things in focus.


Joe
Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now. :rolleyes:
http://photo.joedlh.ne​t (external link)
Editing ok

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Avatar
7,550 posts
Likes: 2539
Joined Oct 2015
Location: Bourbon, Indiana - USA
     
Sep 08, 2016 09:08 as a reply to  @ joedlh's post |  #13

We're drifting a bit here, but focus is only loosely related to IQ. Nobody (in their right mind) shoots an 85L II or a 135L at f/11 trying to get everything in focus. That can be done with $200 Tamron 70-300. Lots more to photography than focus.


Tom,
Film gear: Elan 7NE / Elan 7 / EOS T2
Yashica FX-D (x2) & FX-3 Super 2000 / DSB 28mm f/2.8 / 50mm ML f/2 / 135mm ML f/2.8 / Sigma Zoom-gamma II 21-35mm f/3.4.2 / Yashica ML 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 / Tokina 70-210mm ML f/4.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,935 views & 3 likes for this thread
best downsizing for superior IQ
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is 4bosing
796 guests, 402 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.