I need MORE megapixels!

I have your answer Craig:

Bring your birthday forwards (say to a date in March 2024), and put the new Hasselblad 907X CFV100c, on your gift list. Urge each participant, to pitch in for this beautiful toy of yours.

With this Hasselblad, you'll get those glorious panoramic shots, in a single shot, and the raw files will have enough megapixels to make you "whet."

Hi Craig, you need to take a dive into the lens technology, because cropping is never going to give the same results or look as a proper telephoto lens! Greetings Ruud👋🏻

Just added Steve Vai into my list. Thanks for the nudge.

Mind boggling stuff, crops. Lens & sensor harmony seems to me more simple to understand and implement.

For me 24 Mpx is sweetspot ,good for all kind of photography

Lol

Hi Craig, my Nikon DSLR has 14 Megapixels and is more than enough for me. And I can also enlarge big prints with no image degradation. Nice Album as usual, thanks Craig ☺️

Moar pixels! 😆

I would love to see a sensor size war and have a large format sensor.

mmmmh, so if I thing about what you are saying, you need the extra megapixel to zoom in and reframe the picture, some might say it is the composition of a photo.

I got out and look for a compelling composition and take a picture, (Following your channel for years that is what you did until now)

If I follow your argument here, now what you want to do is: ...you got out, just take a 200MPixel Image of the whole scenery in front of you and do the composition in front of your computer?

The only problem that I have with zooms is myself 😂

Enjoy your vids. Switched from Canon after 30 yrs to OM-1 so guess I am,going in opposite direction.
My thought is shoot what you like, like what you shoot. Jealous of album collection 😀

Getting more pixels its not the way, alll you do is crop in. Take the right picture and you have no need to crop in. Basically needing to crop in so far is to admit you need to get closer.

Hi craig. Please let me know where is the 3x1 image size format at 5.22

Nice video! Thank You! I think you are a "bit lazy", and disregard one VERY IMPORTANT factor. FOV is not, I repeat NOT, another lens! And even with a 35mm on a APSC Sensor it will NEVER look like a 50mm on a FF sensor!!! using a 50mm on a APSC makes it a 75 mmm FOV, and to make the same picture as you could with a 50mm on a FF you have to be farther away, which in turn changes the look and the DOF compared to an FF with an 50mm.... I'm also taking into account that you may use f2 on the FF/50mm combo and a 35mm/f1,4 on a APSC wich makes the DOF "the same" ----- but really the lenses are very differently build....DOF, "compression", the distance to the subject must all be taken into account. Many of my friends, that know and see more than I, INSTANTLY recognize a cropped vs non cropped images. Even if You have 200 mp and use a 17mm lens cropping to the FOV of a 200mm ...It will never look like a 200mm...especially if you have some depth in you pictures. So no! More than 40 are not needed, except for very large prints... More lenses are better.... Theres no work around in physics....

Craig, what you really, really want is the Leica Q3. It is what you are asking for and probably cheaper than buying yet another mega-pixel APS-C Fuji and lenses.

Nice editorial. However, the precedent Fuji's are 26 MP. The earlier XT20 and XH1 were 24MP.

I, too, use the Xt5 and really use only 2 lenses with it, the 16-80 and the 50-140. I tried the 16-55 for a while, but in back-to-back comparisons, I could not see any better image quality than the 16-80 so I kept the 16-80 and sent the 16-55 back. Good quality zooms are the way for me (I have found this with Canon and Sony over the years too) :) I don't really see any image benefit in primes other than wider than F2.8 - but then I photograph landscapes, so F8 is 'very open' to me. I get it for portraits (which I don't take), but only due to the bokeh

Less megapixels, better technique. Simples 😅

Interesting discussion. Another software tool that would be useful I think would be automatic pixel binning at a maximum resolution reducing the noise when using the native format and dealing with a 200MP file. This sort of software telephoto is being used by the 60MP Leica Q with its fixed 28mm lens, successfully I think. I always liked the idea of the multi-focal length lenses that Leica developed to match the frame lines in their rangefinders, optimized for a few focal lengths instead of continuous zoom.

More mega pixels less light gathering capacity. Size of tip of little finger compared to light hiting tip of thumb. So less light gathering capability the more pixels in same sensor. One size doesn't fit all especially if you want details in poor light on say a kingfisher or wren. Just physics getting in the way. a 12 mp ful frame sony a7s could virtually shoot in complete darkness in human eye terms vs 24 mp ful frame a7 bother from just those massive 12mp gathering more light with the right lens.

I see what you are saying but this doesn’t address compression or depth - cropping is a very different thing imo

If you upscale that Sony 40 megapixels sensor to a 33xx44mm sensor size you get 157 megapixel and for me that will be enough, Sony have the sensor, it is just a question of time before we will see it in a Fuji GFX or HBL X, maybe even in a new type of Sony Camera.

I like different focal lengths for their different properties such as compression and distortion. They are tools of the creative mind in photography. Unless you just want snapshots, in which case, use your phone.

Great debate - and challenging the norm. Fantastic ideas Craig. Also intereted in your recent purchase from Chillblast as I'm in the same situation as yourself with a creaking PC. I'm sure you have done more than myself in terms of investigation - I am also keeping that particular model bookmarked and waiting to push the button. Are you in ownership of it yet and does it meet your expectations?

A fascinating discussion around the MP WAR! I have had the Canon 5DsR (51mp) since 2016. I can't see why (or afford) to get any bigger. When you see a good print of moderately large size, no one cares about the MP. The newer 100mp Fuji GFX is expraordinalrily expensive, and that is just the body without the extraordinarily expensive lenses....where will it end?
Cheers, love the discussion and MP challenge

15 minutes of waffling and not saying much in the end....

Get good with less MP. People love the Fuji film recipes for the imperfection/finality of the shots. Also, unless you are printing these shots most images on the internet are 72 dpi JPEGs so when you change the 300 dpi of these files to 72 they will look huge on monitors.

I was never interested in the Fuji x 100 V as a fixed 35 mm lens, but this upcoming Vl version will have 40 MP sensor and ibis and I’m seriously seeing it as a one camera solution for 35 50 shooting. GAS is a real disease.😂

Which is why I simply bit the bullet - an expensive one at that - and for my very special birthday 🎉 I bought myself the Leica Q2 which lens is very capable of capturing all the crops I need. So far, so good. Thank you for all your videos- I’ve been a big fan for a few years now.

I don’t feel an absolute need for more megapixels and I almost always crop my files. I have a Leica Q2 and M11. Crop as needed and all is good. RAW files will always be full fat even if software pretends otherwise when the file is imported. The only thing that changes is depth of field, assuming the distance to the subject remains unchanged. Oh and on metering, the Q2 meters from the crop selected in camera, not from the full frame.

Canon 30D, 8.2mp and a nifty fifty f1.8 lens, both cheap as chips, and NO pay for editing suites = Amazing fun and incredible imagery that looks sweet as a nut even displayed on my 42" TV.
I just don't buy into the GAS syndrome.
I was given the 30D as the bloke that owned it from new said it was rubbish. He had bought the latest Sony A7iii.
I showed him my first round of images I shot on his 30D and he wanted it back.
NOPE. 😂

I've been sticking to one lens and cropping since 2013 when I switched to the RX1. I didn't go through any trauma letting go of my previous OM EM-5 and lenses and enjoyed 10 years on that camera. I've found that my photography over the years has held up regardless of camera—even going back to my 6 MP Konica Minolta 5D, but what more megapixels has gained me has been—as you've pointed out—latitude in post with respect to composition and ability to compose with certain crops previz'd in cam. It's been a treat to shoot and travel with a very light kit.

We've definitely hit an inflection point of 40 mp+ requiring higher precision optics and IBIS to shoot effectively—at least for me, but the return on that investment continues to be an expanded latitude for composition. I, for one, definitely welcome that.

❤❤👍👍👌👌✌✌😊😊

I'm switching over to the Hasselblad X2D primary for the resolution. The 7 stop IBIS and 1tb internal memory/future proof type B is a bonus. In 5 years I'll probably switch to the 500 megapixel!! 😁 😁

Jeez we're still doing the camera masturbation videos? I thought the whole 'megapixel' craze ended years ago. Hasn't there been enough fawning over 'tech specs' and 'guys should i move to full frame ' by now?? I guess not

You probably know this, but the Lumix S1R has a 65:24 option and a multi-shot mode (processed in-camera) of just shy of 200mp.

I have often fantasized about a square sensor (with diagonal size to match existing APS-C or FF lenses). A square APS-C (image circle) sensor would be about 20x20mm and have more pixels than a rectangular (3:2) sensor, so more usable megapixels with the same lens.
Choosing different aspect ratios, as well as (landscape/portrait) orientations, could be done quite easily, no need to for a vertical grip.

It would also bring back some of the 6x6 medium format nostalgia.

Phones are reaching the limit of what extra megapixels can do for you without increasing sensor size. 200MP is rather useless when it is all downscaled to 12.5 anyway, and is of benefit only with digital.zoom. While this gives you an impressive 4x crop zoom... theoretically... those crops are really muddy units the subject is incredibly well lit. Most modern phones don't do well past 2x crops. And newer ones are going back to 3x dedicated telephotos to fill that gap.

I have recently shot the Leitz Phone with the 1" sensor, and that uses digital crop alone because it has no other cameras. I love the softer edges and more natural look compared to oversharpenedand oversmoothened photos from some others. Down to 20mp versus 50/100/200 phones, but that big sensor and the big pixels make it feel more enticing.

I'm guessing that limiting the manufacturers to one lens, even a very expensive one, would put them out of business. So I doubt if this will happen even if technologically possible.

In previous videos you have said you longed for a Leica. A Leica Q3 might fit your requirements and possibly cheaper than all your Fuji gear. Automatic focal length cropping is also built in Lightroom.

Fantastic insight and good narrative. Never thought that. And I never thought you never want a zoom lens especially telephoto for your landscape.

Funny the other day I said to my photo friend, that I want a 100mp medium format camera with a lens that can go from 8mm to 800mm and get sharp photos at all focal lengths, but I don't want to spend more that $1000 on it and has to be less than 1kg. No different in any hobby, everyone is always searching for the perfect setup, there is none and we need to stop, but that drives companies to do more and sell us new stuff.

A dust bin!

I don't see it as the future. It's not the megapixels; it's the sensor size. Cropping is convenient, but there is a limit. If you keep cropping a FF or APSC sensor, you will reach a tiny sensor like the one in the phone or smaller. The image quality, dynamic range, and noise performance will suffer. No cropping will replace a proper focal length. You wouldn't choose a tiny sensor point and shoot as your main landscape tool, why settle for a crop which is effectively the same.

I have to admit I love my GFX 50s ii and XT5 ... And yes, the megapixels do make a difference when you are printing. Very large prints and I do 2 m by one. Made up prince for my customers so does make a difference in that instance

The problem with cropping in is that even though you still get a say, 20 megapixel file, your focus point actually is often altered because you've made the image smaller where you focused in the landscape, then changes so if you like me and do the hyperfocal method, you are going to have to move your. Hyperfocal spot as to not then end up with a slightly blurry. Foreground even though you Ve cropped in if that makes sense. This is something you need to consider when you're cropping in.

"Would you like to format?"

...oh no. 😳

My Lumix S1R is 47.3 Mpx, has a 187 Mpx high resolution mode, read the T & C. I could have much of the convenience of zoom lenses using my TS-E lenses. I'd have shift too. I think that pushes my TS-E 90 out to 460mm equivalent, more if APS-C cropping is acceptable.