Reasons for upgrading

[theredun]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

John - (Mark - I was just about to post the same info... )
Briefly, for A3 at 300ppi you need a 1Ds Mark II/III, 5D Mark II or 7D. For A3 at 200ppi, anything from a 350D up will suffice - (it says here).

Millie - studio?

[Nathaniel]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Getting more confused by the minute and technology behind all the arguments for upgrading. My forte is Accountancy and getting to the semi retired state. So perhaps the better informed members might like to englighten me as to the maximum number of m.pixels one should consider to obtain a shaprt enlargement up to A4- A3 size. I am not averse to upgrading as I was only a few months ago a very committed film/slide camera person with the EOS 3 as my main camera. After I got hooked on to DSLR's via the 350d, 8 m.pixel camera, I sold the EOS 3 and then bought the 450d as well since it offered a bit more for like spot metering, automatic sensor cleaning, a bigger LCD screen BUT keeping to the small compact size of the 350d. So at present I use both DSLR's- the 450d & 350d on my Safari trips abroad, one fitted with either an EF 75mm-300mm or EF 55mm-250mm IS lens & the one fitted with either an 18mm-55mm IS or EF 28mm-105mm lens DEPENDING on what I am trying to "shoot" without changing lenses in the midst of a "shoot"! My primary aim is to get good,sharp images for my pleasure and photo album (I print the best shots for the album).

Therefore I would like some advice from the advanaced and scientifically minded members on the most number of pixels I should go for to obtain the sort of photographs I want- sharp,clear, and able to enlarge up to say A3 size. I am also consious of the NOISE problem with higher m.pixels esp when I increas the ISO to accomodate low light photography.

[eeyore]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

If a won the jackpot lotto, then my order would be in for two 1D mk IV and the following lenses.

Now you're talking; that's what I call a serious upgrade!

[Nathaniel]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Hi Eeyore!

Being an ageing photographer I wouldn't want to cart all that gear on holiday, even if I won the lottery. Light, portability and being comfortable with my gear is my "moto".

[Neilly]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Hi Nathaniel,

You're getting to old, mate. More kit the merrier - well perhaps not. However, last year when I visited my eldest son in Japan we walked to the top of an extinct volcano. The only way up was walking. At the top there was this small Japanese guy with 2x 1D's - 1 with a 600mm L prime lens on it & the other with an 800mm L prime lens on. He was attempting to photograph Mt Fuji - which like most times in the year was hidden by cloud. I did have to smile somewhat because his camera bag was nearly as big as him. Very nice guy, though. Oh, & btw he was 81 years old - just hope I can be that active at that age!

TTFN,
Neil

[colin C]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Therefore I would like some advice from the advanaced and scientifically minded members on the most number of pixels I should go for to obtain the sort of photographs I want- sharp,clear, and able to enlarge up to say A3 size. I am also consious of the NOISE problem with higher m.pixels esp when I increas the ISO to accomodate low light photography.

That's a perfectly sensible question Nathaniel, for which there is no straightforward answer and that is why the Canon chart is very conservative in it's recommendations. It is probably well out of date as the example shown indicates a 1Ds MKII, which is somewhat long in the tooth by todays standard.

Millie has already correctly stated that camera phones with a 10mp camera take crap pictures. That is because the 10mp is not measured the same way as proper cameras, which use "effective" pixels to designate the number. Effective pixels is not the total number of pictures on the chip, but the maximum number of pixels on the chip that would be used to capture a picture, which is a much lower number. Camera phones are normally "interpolated pixels". That means that there may only be 2mp but software interpolates (a fancy way of educated guessing) what the other pixels would be if the sensor were 10mp.

Much is also down to the processor. Canon cameras using roughly the same sensor chips give better quality results as the processor has been upgraded from DIGIC II, DIGIC III and now DIGIC IV and generally, those cameras that have twin DIGIC processors have a quality/speed advantage over their single processor counterparts.

Even with the latest processors, digital noise is often down to innaccurate exposure, high ISO, or a combination of both. The latest cameras such as the 7D and 1D MKIV are able to handle high ISO noise much better than their earlier counterparts, but the 7D appears to be a little intolerant to underexposure, resulting in high noise in the shadow areas, but if you get the exposure spot on, or a little to the right of the histogram, the results can be superb.

My last exhibition was at the RNLI Headquaters. It consisted of 22 prints, mounted and printed to A3+ and the theme was the sea. Most of the images were taken on a 10mp camera with twin DIGIC III processors, some were taken on a 8mp camera with single DIGIC II processors and one was taken on a 6mp compact camera and I wasn't sure it even had a processor in it! But all of them were high quality shots because the exposure was spot on and the ISO wasn't too high and from memory, the only higher ISO shots were taken on the 10mp camera.

Therefore, I would suggest that any modern Canon with 10mp or above, using a DIGIC III or DIGIC IV processor, will produce good quality A3 prints .......... as long as you "nail" the exposure and don't go too high with the ISO. Shooting in RAW will also help to fine tune the shot to get the best quality out of it.

Rather a long winded way to get to the conclusion, but I hope it helped.

Colin

[briansquibb]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Nicely put Colin - ps can you show us a lifeboat picture - please :-)

[Nathaniel]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Thanks Neilly and Colin for your input into this thread.Very interesting indeed and I trust we will get rich with the knowlege we have gained from this discussion.

Firstly Neilly,I wouldn't like to nor do I have the strength to cart all that gear about even though I am NOT as near as the Japanese bloke. I like to travel and photograph comfortably. Also my photography is on more or less flat terrain like in South Arfica, India, Sri Lanka and the lot. My days of "climbing" is in the past now for me.

Colin, thanks for your input. Very valuable indeed. It is perhaps better to upgrade only if there is a definite advantage for "you the photographer". Most new models bring out something new,an advancement but if you don't need it or consider it essential then don't upgrade. The end result is that the photos you take are what you want & these gadgets are only a via media to that effect. I have been to the Kruger National park in South Africa and I have seen fellow safari members carting big bags full of camera gear but I have not seen them dip into their bags for a special lens or another camera for a "special shot". They seem to manage with either one camera and one all purpose lens or two cameras with lens fitted for what they want to "shoot". Therefore my question is why cart all that gear? Is it to show off or what.

[Guest]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

John - (Mark - I was just about to post the same info... )
Briefly, for A3 at 300ppi you need a 1Ds Mark II/III, 5D Mark II or 7D. For A3 at 200ppi, anything from a 350D up will suffice - (it says here).

Millie - studio?

Many thanks Theredun

Starting to save !!

John

[Guest]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

I always thought the S in 1Ds stood for super expensive :) or more realistic studio model.

As for megapixel to prints size then page 67 of EOS magazine October -December 2009 has a nice table.

For A3 at 300ppi 16.7 effective mega-pixels or more, at 200 ppi 8.2 effective mega-pixels according to the table.

Thanks Mark
John

[Millie]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Therefore my question is why cart all that gear? Is it to show off or what.

I might be a "security thing", dragging all their kit around maybe safer than leaving it at their holiday accommodation.

Someone with a £89 P+S could very well ask the same question about you with your 450D and 75-300mm lens.
Out of interest. How would you reply if “£89 P+S man” asked you that question?

Millie

[Nathaniel]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Quite true my friend. The £89 P&S camera person could ask me the same question but perhaps I would say that I am using ALL the gear which I take with me i.e the two cameras & attached lenses. I will not cart anything I know I will not use- call it as forward planning before my trip. I know what I wish to photograph and the gear that I need for that purpose.From my experience I know that a long telephoto zoom & a short telephoto zoom are important for me on holiday and on the sort of trips I make. Add to that a flash,& 2x extender (front fitting) + charger are a must. If I use two camera bodies for the two types of lenses it is for my convenience- speed of "shooting" without having to stop and change lenses as it would be with one camera body. I certainly will not cart a bag full of camera gear which I will not use.

[eeyore]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

That's why you have someone ELSE to carry the gear around. or buy a truck!

PS The P&S camera person may need to think about upgrading!

[Nathaniel]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Will NOT encourage P&S person to upgrade; also no chance of getting P&S person to carry my extra bits a bob.I Like the status quo- but I like your idea very much- if only if..............

[colin C]

Re: Reasons for upgrading

Weight is a problem on safari. Not especially for carrying it around, but the baggage weight limits on some aircraft. With one body, a 100mm - 400mm and a wide to midrange zoom seems to be the order of the day. On my last safari I took two bodies, a 500mm permanently on one and generaly a 70 - 200mm on the other. I also had a 17 - 40mm for scenery and a 1.4x converter for if I needed a little more "reach".

The 500mm proved to be the most useful lens and nearly always propped on my beanbag. This is an example of what it achieved:



It's not only a bitingly sharp lens, but with careful control of the aperture, you can achieve some wonderfully blurred backgrounds that add a three dimensional effect to the subject.

Colin