Higher mp and zooming

T

timboellis

Suspended / Banned
Messages
282
Name
Tim Ellis
Edit My Images
No
A quick question regards to these newer cameras that do 24 megapixels as in Nikon D3200 , just now if I take a photo on my 10 megapixel camera and say for example see my dog in a pose I like in the distance as of now if I zoom in on the picture then obviously the quality will be gone.

I presume then with a 24mp then I have that little more capability of zooming in with PS to get a slightly clearer image.

The reason for asking is that I tend to have a small handful of pictures that I would liked to have zoomed in further but not able to as do not have a zoom over 200mm say, and forking out hundreds just for a few shots really worth the money.

Hope that makes sense?
 
It really depends on the quality of glass in front of such a sensor as well, but yes it will let you crop the image much more, it's the reason some wildlife photographers like to use a crop sensor camera, as not only are they cropped in in the first place they can crop in even more and should have more detail left in the image, but like I say, you really need top quality glass to match.
 
Yes, it depends much more on the lens and the physical size of the image than the number of pixels (within reason).

When you enlarge a smaller part of the picture, you're asking a lot more resolution from the lens. It's a bit like having a car that accelerates from 0-60 in ten seconds, then expecting it to go from 60-120 in the same time - it doesn't happen. With lenses, as resolution goes up, contrast goes down and the image doesn't look as sharp, regardless of pixel count. This is the fundamental reason why larger sensors always deliver sharper pictures.

Sure, birders often prefer smaller formats with more pixels per square mm, but to make that work well they also have very sharp lenses, like Canon and Nikon's super-primes at £5k a piece. To continue the car analogy, basically what they have in those lenses is a car that will accelerate from 0-60 in six seconds, so it will then run from 6-120 in ten and you still end up with good sharpness.
 
If you are going to switch from the Sony to an interchangeable lens SLR, main difference will be that you wont have the same zoom range to begin with.
I have the 3200. Yes, I can crop a LOT to magnify subject in post-process and still keep pixels in the picture.... To be honest, I've been doing that for years, from a 7.1Mp 3x 25-105 equivilent zoom compact, which has been my main digital camera; and sizing down to 800 on the wide-side for screen/web display anyway, crops have tended to have more pixels than re-size display image.... may be food for thunk in that.... your Sony probably has a lot of redundant quality to begin with.
But, swapping to the D3200...kit lens is 18-55, that's 27-82.5 'equivilent, and at f3.5-4.5 not only shorter in zoom range than your Sony, but also slower... BUT should be 'better' glass.
You would likely find that little extra 'wide angle' a loss, and you'd be finding that little extra zoom 'reach' more of a lack, more often... 80-120 is quite a big jump.
Cropping from bigger pixel image, you'd get it back, and that bigger pixel image would probably be a 'better' image from the better glass, but you'd be cropping a lot more tightly to get the same composition.
But of course, with the SLR you could get another lens to suit your needs..... which is where it starts getting expensive!
the kit 18-55's are not worth much 2nd hand; and bundled with the body, kits are often cheaper than body-only price; so you have to treat it as a freeby to get you started; another lens, either a 55-200 or 55-300 to extend zoom range, or something like a Sigma 18-200 'Super-Zoom' would probably double the cost of the camera! BUT, again, good glass, and zoom range that would give 27-300 'equivilent', you have the extra zoom 'reach' in the glass, you wouldn't have to do it digitally in Post-Process!
Either-Way though, its a LOT of money for little gain in what you want to do.
Outside the box? Unless you have need or or would like to explore SLR photography more; then some of the other bridge or super-compacts have pretty astounding zoom ranges these days. O/H has a Nikon L310 I think; not a camera I can thoroughly reccomend its a real point & press special; but as such, it packs 16Mp resolution, and I think its a 21x zoom range thats equivilent to about 18-250 on a crop sensor camera, or 27-180 in 35mm, and there's a bigger brother that offers 30 times zoom.

The Party trick in your Sony, though is APS-Crop sized sensor, same as in an entry level DSLR, and that's worth a fair bit as far as IQ goes.... but as said... there's probably a fair bit of redundant IQ you never exploit anyway, even at a 'lowly' 10Mpix, unless you are making prints and big ones from image files.... on screen, 1024 ish on the wide-side display resolution? EVERYTHING is going to be resized down to about the resolution of a 1.3Mpix camera anyway!
 
Thanks for the I depth answer, I am more than happy with my sony it can do more or less what I want from it.

However just missing the long reach at times.

Previously when I had my d50 / D70 along with a sigma 70-300 apo found that was a goo setup but still find that my sony shots looked so much nicer.

With regards to the lens kit I would have got the kit with the VR lens as this is the same price as body only, and would expect to get a super zoom.

That all said an thinking about this a bit more as I am 90% happy with my sony then maybe I could think about An older camera with a super zoom jut for the other 10%?

But then if I do that they what do I get?

Just thinking about a camera basically that could give me a fast fps and a fast shutter speed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top