Photography

I have been on a journey, comparing different megapixels for quite a while now. For example, using 33 megapixels, using Gigapixel AI to make it larger (which doesn't add detail) but increases resolution for you to see more detail.

It seems that with sharp glass, I do not notice much more detail with 61 MP camera, but I notice more resolution. I do notice some more detail. You can zoom in about 1.4x more than 33 MP. It seems like the lenses have more to do with the actual detail than the megapixels and the megapixels may help but they have to do with resolution.

I started this journey years ago. I remember downgrading from a 36 MP camera to a 20 MP camera and at the time because it was a different brand I had a lens that wasn't super sharp. I felt I made a huge mistake. But then as I got sharp glass, I started noticing I was seeing the same detail, I just couldn't zoom in as much.

Now with Adobe Super Resolution and Gigapixel AI, I am able to make them the same size and see if there is truly more detail. Honestly, if there is, it's hard for me to see when using sharp glass.

I'd rather use the 61 MP because I dont always want to use software (which can cause artifacts sometimes,) to crop. I've read that 61 MP gives you detail about like 16 MP x 2.

What I notice though is, for example, going from 24 MP to 33 MP, seems like a large jump in detail and resolution. Although the gap there is smaller. But going from 33 MP to 61 MP, the jump doesn't seem to be as large although it's about double the megapixels.

Also, the benefit of 61 MP resolution, you want it to be sharp 1:1 if you want to crop any. Some here told me to improve my technique and I did and it definitely did help.

I don't know why this interest me so much but it does. Because I see people claim they went from say 36 MP to 61 MP and are, "blown away," by the extra detail. I do not find that to be the case. For a while I thought something was wrong with my camera. On my last test I thought it was even my IBIS.

I went to Sony's website and looked at Sony A7RIV and A7RV images they took at full resolution 100% zoomed in (and more) and my camera definitely looks as detailed as what they show on their website. So I wonder if people are being hyperbolic.

There is definitely more resolution, which allows you to get a crop you couldn't get with 33 MP unless you used software, there is def an advantage to printing. And there IS, (let me be clear,) more detail. But I guess I have yet to see the detail be so much more that it blew me away.

This makes me wonder, why do you notice such a huge difference going from 24 MP to 33 MP? I definitely in that situation notice a big difference. And that isn't that many more MP.

I am strictly talking full frame here. I have seen medium format images that were at 100 MP for example and there was definitely a lot more detail. But it makes me wonder if with full frame, is it not as big of a deal?

One thing is for certain. The lens definitely makes the biggest difference.

​