30D, 40D, 50D cropability comparison image

I was curious how much more "real estate" the 50D had over my old (but loved) 30D so I put this together to visualize the difference. All based on the max size of the given camera.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I hate math so I will ask instead.

If one were to consider cropping ability would not the labels go from the larger image being the 30D then the middle one the 40D and the tighter one or smaller one the 50D?

All being the same resolution after the crop, that is the native resolution of the 30D, and the image after cropping to the 30D resolution using the 40D and 50D.

Just a thought . I of course would need to do the awful math but my guess it would look similar to the above but labeled as outlined.

On second thought I get how your example works . My brain is slowly coming to life this morning.

I for some reason could not see the idea but now I get it. the smallest crop is the 50D image at the 30D resolution. In this example in order to get this tighter image on a 30D one would need to get closer where as using the 50D all one has to do is crop.

Very nice thank you and once again sorry.

In reality you'd have 3 images all with the same field of view and composition, only with a different number of pixels.

I can see how something like this might work if you were talking about differences in sensor size, but as they all have the same sized sensor I'm having a hard time understanding how the 50d is seeing a wider view than the 30d.

Add to that the fact that 100% crops from the 30d look slightly better than 100% crops from the 50d, unless you've got a very sharp lens and a very steady hand...

.....I dunno about your math, but it's a cool photo ! You must have some great security clearance, clarence......

I think that's a cool photo. My understanding is that the OP was trying to say that the 50D creates a bigger image due to the higher megapixel.

So if we disregard the cool photo and focus only on the squares, then it will be easier to understand.

Sorry to say this, but this thread has no physical or mathematical basis to exist. The problem here is that you are comparing the SAME crop with different resolutions. The boxes should be in the opposite order, showing how much tighter each section would be at the same pixel dimensions due to the increased resolution. Please redo it in order to properly explain what you want to explain.

Other than that, the whole resolution based approach to comparisons is outdated now that the resolutions are higher than what most people print at anyway.

Ooops, sorry. On second thought this really is a bad example. Evidently my brain has still yet to kick in.

If a mod would kind heartedly put this thread out of its misery so its not confusing to others, I'd appreciate it.

As for the clearance, it's easy when you're a controller at the airport. I just grabbed a radio said "Hey Bill (other guy on duty), I'm heading out to the runway."

Jeff wrote in post #7387870
Ooops, sorry. On second thought this really is a bad example. Evidently my brain has still yet to kick in.

If a mod would kind heartedly put this thread out of its misery so its not confusing to others, I'd appreciate it.

As for the clearance, it's easy when you're a controller at the airport. I just grabbed a radio said "Hey Bill (other guy on duty), I'm heading out to the runway."

Just don't do that when it's your shift at the tower

Better to just replace the image with what you wanted to demonstrate (so blank with boxes), and then put the airplane one in with the reversed boxes, followed by virtual 100% crops (really easy to do, just resize your image to the size of a 30d and 40d, then take a 200x200 px crop of each in the same place, then take a 200x200 px crop of the 50d image in the same place. somewhere that there is detail that would be blurred out at 30d size would be best)

So maybe this is what I mean?
I've confused myself now.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Jeff,

For the way my brain thinks about these things your example was perfect. Doing it the other way round just confuses me.

The 2nd example is much better. As stated by others the first example was bad as all sensors would take the same picture, only the 50d would have more pixels packed into it. There would be no difference in field of view going from the 20d - 50d

Lowner wrote in post #7388090
Jeff,

For the way my brain thinks about these things your example was perfect. Doing it the other way round just confuses me.

Cool, I've now succeded in confusing all of the people all of the time.

This looks significant on to me. I think the big question now is that if the quality of each pixel in 50D is at least compatible to that of 40D and 30D. If so, 50D is a big winner.

Jeff wrote in post #7388068
So maybe this is what I mean?
I've confused myself now.

Yup, that would be the second part right there. However, do use a better hosting place than POTN, compression artifacts in that comparison kill any details.