Jump to content

Printing - Does the extra 8mp make a difference?

Naddan28
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
Arnold Newman Newbie

Arnold Newman

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm surprised by how many people have answered "no" to this thread. It would be interesting to know how many of these folks actually own an X-P2 or X-T2 and a large format printer. I would suspect the answer to that would also be "no" in most cases.

 

The original question is better phrased as *at what print size* does 24mp start to offer improved print quality. Clearly, at some combination of print size and viewing distance a resolution of "x" megapixels will start to break up where "x" times 150% will not. The answer will vary depending on subject matter, printing substrate, preferred viewing distance, the capacity of one's own eyesight, and one's ability to properly prepare an image for printing.

Edited by Arnold Newman
Link to post
Share on other sites
pilius Explorer

pilius

Posted
Posted

I remember reading something about a better "color resolution" due to the new sensor-processor combo (esp. Velvia). I think there will be a difference, depending on printing size, but maybe not a huge one in resolving detail, more about the image rendition in a whole.

 

I think you should compare the two Ts at your local dealer. Same lens, same framing and so on...

Link to post
Share on other sites
johant Mentor

johant

Posted
Posted

I'm surprised by how many people have answered "no" to this thread. It would be interesting to know how many of these folks actually own an X-P2 or X-T2 and a large format printer. I would suspect the answer to that would also be "no" in most cases.

 

 

Well, not me ... I never print larger than 30x45cm. So the 8mp does not make a difference to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Naddan28 Collaborator

Naddan28

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I remember reading something about a better "color resolution" due to the new sensor-processor combo (esp. Velvia). I think there will be a difference, depending on printing size, but maybe not a huge one in resolving detail, more about the image rendition in a whole.

I think you should compare the two Ts at your local dealer. Same lens, same framing and so on...

I asked Fuji x ambassador about the printing difference and interestingly he said that it was colour and rendition as a whole was different but no huge resolving difference unless you print huge and pixel peep.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Rand47 Explorer

Rand47

Posted
Posted

Resolution-wise, there's not a great deal of difference. But that's not the only difference between the two sensors / processors.

The usable DR of the 24 MP sensor (in actual shooting - I don't know that the tests say) is significantly better in terms of pulling detail out of shadow areas. Frankly, I was surprised by this.

 

Rand

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rand47 Explorer

Rand47

Posted
Posted

on prints or on screen?

In prints! I'm one of those people who believes a photograph isn't a photograph unless it is printed. Otherwise it is a graphic representation of 1's and 0's. :-)

 

I do fine art printing for clients, and my own work. I print files from many different brands and models of cameras. The 24mp Fuji sensor has really impressed me more than I thought it would in comparing it with some of the heavy-hitter sensors out there today. I won't even mention some of the files I think it is "better than" because you either wouldn't believe me, and/or write me off as a Fuji fan-boy, which I'm very much "not so much." :-)

 

Rand

Link to post
Share on other sites
sacherjj Contributor

sacherjj

Posted
Posted

24 MP is a 22.5% increase in linear dimensions over 16 MP.  This gives you the freedom of cropping in about 1/4 with no penalty.  But it also means that the print that has the same resolution is only 22.5% taller or wider.  It isn't a huge difference.  That doesn't mean I don't still want an X-T2.  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...