| Joined: | Thu Apr 19th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Having to crush 45MP images to send back to newspaper or agency is a pain better to just KISS it and have lower resolution MP image and it also allows for larger photosites so less shadow noise. All important in pj work when you might be shooting at high ISO.
Nikon will sell loads more cameras to photojournalists, wildlife and sports photographers than to landscape and architectural photographers!
Also like Eric and I have said so often. Most of the time if the image is well composed then 25MP is more than enough.
That said in my landscape images 45MP is great but 100MP would be better! Going to need bigger computer, more hard disk space, better monitor, more, more, more! Sometimes enough is enough!
The only possible justification for 50mp is when hard cropping-in is necessary or the final print is going to be 'wall size'. **
If you are able to get close enough to your subject (with camera position or focal length) to fill the frame such that no subsequent cropping is required, then 25mp is fine. Similarly if you are only printing upto A0.
Disappointingly, many of the new functions that are desirable/useful only come on the expensive models.... along with the high mega pixels specs.
The D850 is a case in point.
**
Even then, the viewers perception of quality and the viewing situation can counter this. I had one of my D1X 3mp images of a clients articulated lorry projected across the end wall of a major London exhibition centre hosting a haulage expo back in the day. I never saw the projection and I bet purists would have cringed but my client was chuffed to bits....and got loads of business. That's what mattered.
____________________
Eric