20-megapixel Cameras v. 6-megapixel Cameras

Great illustration zach, i have tried to explain this to people several times.  This is exactly why the jump from a 6mp to a 8 or 10mp is pretty insignificant, especially if only printing 8×10.  Going from a 6 to 8 mp only yields about 1 or 2 inches larger image at printing resolutions.  

Im sorry, but I’ve always believed Ken Rockwell to be poser and an idiot. That article just confirmed it.

He is comparing sharpness between a 4 MP and a 12 MP camera at 768 x 539 and 100 ppi? There will not be a difference at that size. Thats like saying a $60,000 Lexus and a $10,000 Hundai both handle the same at 10 MPH.

The only difference in “sharpness” will be in the technique and the glass used. Considering its Ken Rockwell, I’m guessing its technique.

Then he compares exposure (?) and color. Brilliant. Ken, you genius of all things photogaphic , YOU are responsible for proper exposure, not the camera. And the color? Who compares color straight out of a camera? The 5D has 12 different color settings (if anyone even uses them) and they are irrelevant if you shoot RAW anyway – which most professional photographers do. The $150 P&S is designed to use right out of the box at “factory settings”- the 5D isn’t.

So what is he tryng to say? A $150 P&S camera is capable of taking publishable-quality images? Of course it is under the lighting conditions with good technique. Are we supposed to be impressed with how clever he is to have figured this out on his own? Classic Rockwell.

Man, I haven’t been to his site is ages. Thanks for the laugh!

I’ve owned both the D200 and 5D. Both are excellent cameras.

Rockwell gets some things right. The D200 is much more ergonomically intuitive than the 5D (I would argue that Nikon cameras in general are better designed as far as buttons and dials being where they should be)

I also think the D200 is the best value out there in a camera. Period. The auto ISO feature, however, is one I would never use anyway. The 5D has the best image quality of any digital camera I have ever owned, but it comes at a price – marginal $$$ and handling. The more I shoot with this camera, the more responsive I am becoming with it, though.

As far as Rockwell is concerned, Zack hit the nail on the head. I have a good freind in Long Beach, CA who is a well-known photographer and printer and he knows Rockwell personally. If we are ever sharing a beer sometime, I will tell you some stories. But anyone who devotes more of his website to his own biography than his images (only a slight exaggeration) and asks for donations to run it (he claims it costs him thousands to run the site) I dont take too seriously. I never have.

For good information and reviews on Nikon products, you would be better served reading this guy instead, http://www.bythom.com

Doo doo doo doo, doo doo doo doo…

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nm/aliens/index.htm

Sorry…
Back to the point, Eric’s observation is a good one. You don’t gain a whole lot in the difference between 2 megapixels everything else being equal. Zach could you put percentages on your chart? I’m too lazy with math and there is more of you number wise than me

Wow! That is quite an entertaining page.

Zach I think your referring to dpi but meaning ppi.