Jump to content
Regis

Thought on camera resolution?

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

Does any of you have seen a marked difference in sales when changing from say, a 12MP camera to a 24MP or more camera?

As in an increased number of sales.

 

Thank you for your time, have a good day,

Regis

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - it won't make any difference if you're trying to sell stock (except perhaps in the vanishingly small chance of an image being required for something like a poster campaign). You'd be better off spending the money on lenses.

 

Alex

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all, but from a photography (ie nothing to do with sales) point of view the change was extra-ordinary. I went from the Nikon D300 to the D750 and I was knocked out by the difference. Not so much by the resolution change but by the improvement in high ISO and dynamic range. If you have an older 12MP model then a change to a newer sensor will open your eyes.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alex and Colin,

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

The reason I ask is because I work every days in a job where I use mostly two Nikon, a D800 and a D810, and an array of lenses and lights.

Mostly indoor.

 

So for what I do outside of work, I just want to have fun, trying to keep pleasure in the craft if I may say.

As such I use a small Fuji X-100, the original one with a 12Mp sensor.

This is what I have been using for a while for the photographs that I upload on Alamy.

Apart for the past few weeks where I used my child camera (a more recent X-100) as mine was at the repair shop. While using my child's camera, I realised that mine was rather old and that maybe I should use a newer one?

 

I actually really enjoy the small and light little fuji, even if it is not perfect.

So I might continue with that for a little while.

Until a new version with a better lens comes out.

 

Thank you for your time and advice.

Have a good day,

Regis

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Regis said:

Hi Alex and Colin,

 

Thanks for the replies.

 

The reason I ask is because I work every days in a job where I use mostly two Nikon, a D800 and a D810, and an array of lenses and lights.

Mostly indoor.

 

So for what I do outside of work, I just want to have fun, trying to keep pleasure in the craft if I may say.

As such I use a small Fuji X-100, the original one with a 12Mp sensor.

This is what I have been using for a while for the photographs that I upload on Alamy.

Apart for the past few weeks where I used my child camera (a more recent X-100) as mine was at the repair shop. While using my child's camera, I realised that mine was rather old and that maybe I should use a newer one?

 

I actually really enjoy the small and light little fuji, even if it is not perfect.

So I might continue with that for a little while.

Until a new version with a better lens comes out.

 

Thank you for your time and advice.

Have a good day,

Regis

 

You're welcome - I also use a D800E and other Nikons for my day job, but it's definitely overkill for Alamy!

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Alex Ramsay said:

Until a new version with a better lens comes out.

 

I believe they have used the same lens on all their models, and it's very good indeed so I doubt they will change it now. I also use the original 12Mp X100 and haven't felt the need to change it. It's had a lot of abuse and still works perfectly, the only limitation for me being the battery life, you need several and the OEM ones seem to be best. If anything happened to mine I think I would go for the 16Mp X100S or X100T just to give that extra leeway if cropping is needed, though Alamy accept images right down to 3000 x 2000 px. For me I think the 24Mp X100F would be overkill. I do also use a DSLR with a range of lenses but I never leave the house without the Fuji.

 

There are quite a few threads about suitable cameras for Alamy and with smaller, pocketable cameras with smaller sensors then more Mp can be a disadvantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But to achieve these somewhat rare sales you need some resolution:

 

Usage: Indoor display
Media: Non commercial display
Industry sector: Non Profit - other
Print run: 1
Image Size: up to full area

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from Niels's rare sale, I think the only real advantage of extra pixels from a stock image perspective is that it gives you more "wriggle room" depending on how you frame the image in camera. By this, I mean you have more scope to crop, rotate, adjust verticals/horizontals and downsize (for sharpening). Otherwise, I agree with Colin that the bigger difference is in terms of the ISO, noise reduction capabilities and improved dynamic range that a newer camera has. I use a Nikon D7000 as my main camera which is a 16.1MP camera. I don't really like pushing ISO above 800 as noise can become too noticeable/difficult to handle for stock. A newer camera would hopefully improve this situation and is the main reason I would choose to upgrade myself, rather than simply for more pixels.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Niels Quist said:

But to achieve these somewhat rare sales you need some resolution:

 

Usage: Indoor display
Media: Non commercial display
Industry sector: Non Profit - other
Print run: 1
Image Size: up to full area

 

 

Sold one like this two weeks ago,  one of my best sales to date.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EzHighway said:

Sold one like this two weeks ago,  one of my best sales to date.  

 

Congrats. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

Apart from Niels's rare sale, I think the only real advantage of extra pixels from a stock image perspective is that it gives you more "wriggle room" depending on how you frame the image in camera. By this, I mean you have more scope to crop, rotate, adjust verticals/horizontals and downsize (for sharpening). Otherwise, I agree with Colin that the bigger difference is in terms of the ISO, noise reduction capabilities and improved dynamic range that a newer camera has. I use a Nikon D7000 as my main camera which is a 16.1MP camera. I don't really like pushing ISO above 800 as noise can become too noticeable/difficult to handle for stock. A newer camera would hopefully improve this situation and is the main reason I would choose to upgrade myself, rather than simply for more pixels.

 

One advantage -- in addition to more "wiggle room" -- I've found to using a newer camera is that the latest sensors are much improved when it comes to noise control. For instance, I notice a big difference between my 24 MP Sony A6000 and earlier 14 MP/16 MP Sony cameras -- i.e. noise at higher ISO's is virtually nonexistent with the A6000.  I tend to downsize about 25% of my images, so the extra resolution often doesn't make all that much difference otherwise. I still have lots of sales of images that were captured with a 10 MP Sony DSLR.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I would say that the image is more important than the Resolution.

The image of mine on Alamy that is licensed almost every month

for the last two years was shot with a Kodak / Nikon DCS-620 or

a 2.1MP, shot at 1600 ISO.  Finished it at 2800 by.

 

These days I work mostly with NIKON D800's and the large image

size is wonderful, for cropping and straightening.  Also the color

depth on the 800's is wonderful.  I can also work at 3200IS0 with

little problem when I downsize to 4200 by.

 

FYI, I only shoot in RAW, 16bit in aRGB color.

 

Chuck

Edited by Chuck Nacke
addition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Here is the advantage of a high resolution modern sensor.

 

Canon 5Ds full frame 50 megapixel sensor iso 3200 18mm prime lens focused at 10 feet,  f5.6 for depth of field, shot quickly on walkthrough without perfect lining up or even looking through eyepiece.

 

Resulting in slow shutter camera shake, too narrow depth of field, lots of noise particularly on underexposed jacket on right, and in need of some cropping.

 

Solution - crop and straighten, and then downsize remainder to 12 megapixels to extend depth of field, eliminate slight camera shake, eliminate most noise.

 

The disadvantage over my Sony 100X is that the 5Ds is too obvious and much heavier.

 

shopping-for-groceries-in-st-lawrence-ma

 

Edited by Bill Brooks
changed downsize to "12 megapixels" had 18
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shoot with Fuji, too. X-T2. It’s 24MP, and when it came out, I jumped on it. I’d believed for several years that was the “perfect” MP size.  I’d been shooting the 16MP X-T1. To me, 24MP is not overkill for all the reasons others have given. More latitude for straightening, cropping, making a vertical out of a horizontal when I forgot to get the vertical in camera. Also, if an image is just a bit soft, downsizing sharpens it up enough to pass QC. 

Yet when I joined, I was shooting a 6.2mp camera, and having to upsize according to Alamy specifications at the time! Although I admit, failures were more common through the 6-12mp cameras I used. They were noisier, too. All Nikons. I later had a D800, and to me, that was overkill, while others think it’s ideal. I didn’t keep that brick very long. 😁

I do think what we desire in MP is a very individual thing, though. 

Betty

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

24MP is not overkill

 

Just to clarify, I was just referring to the X100 series and for the type of pictures I take on it, I'm not suggesting that 24Mp is too many. I know people make a case for far more MP than that, both for particular high-end sales and to allow for flexibility when cropping and correcting verticals etc. as I do with my own DSLR pictures. It's just that generally I don't do much of either with my X100 pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

New cameras do have their charms. I just uploaded a batch taken at ISO 2500, 7600+pixels on the long side and I didn't downsize, assume they'll pass, even my D700 which I loved couldn't give me a clean image at that high an ISO. Also shot outside at night (after dark, not at twilight) at 1/8 to 1/20 second and the IBIS is a big help, I got a lot of detail, shooting at f/5.6 or higher. So, on the whole happy I switched from the 12MP Nikon to the 42MP Sony, more for the tiny size and clean high ISO images, than for the MP (checking for dust spots on such large images takes much longer)  but yes it is overkill. I probably would have been happy with a 24 MP camera.

 

I have a few images that I shot with my 90mm macro lens, using it as a short telephoto, of a bird that was way too far away in a tree and had to crop away most of the image and still had a nice sized one left, but I don't usually crop very much. But it is nice to be able to do it.

 

For your purposes the 24MP x100 sounds like a good idea, but not a necessity. From an artistic standpoint, having all that extra image info is really wonderful. I had a 16MP Nikon D5100  too and found that the 12MP D700 nearly always gave me better pictures, although unless I was pixel peeping, the 16MP Olympus OMD E-1 could hold its own with the D700 (then the D700 might win out). It sounds like the X100 series cameras are terrific - I have lots of fine art phtographer friends who love them as their carry around cameras. 

 

Another site I'm on allows photos as small as 4MP,  but one of the guys in charge said many clients search by file size and want at least 24MP (some who need large files and some who think hi-res will look better online LOL).  Alamy probably has similar clients, so that could help there. OTOH,  I still see 6MP images from my D70 licensed, and last month I made more iPhone sales on that related site than I did here, so whatever works best for you. 24MP in a tiny point and shoot sounds intriguing.

 

 

Edited by Marianne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

Yes I remember the Kodak DCS 200, was the first digital camera I worked with, as assistant in a big studio.

At the time it was more expensive than a car, and from memory, was around 1.5MP

It was attached to a computer because it could not save the images to a card...

And we felt like the kings of the world using it...

Probably because we were young...

 

Now about the Fuji X-100, I am not looking for a smaller camera, I just want one that I have fun when using it.

This is a camera that I really like not just for the small size, but also because it reminds me of the cameras that I used a few years ago, that had films inside. I am very happy with the quality of image that it produce, I was just wondering if having more MP would make a big difference in sales.

If it is not huge, I might wait for the new version.

 

I think that I read somewhere that a Fuji manager said that in 2020 they will have a new one coming out, with a new sharper lens and better autofocus, and maybe weather sealing.

So I will try to make my old one last a bit more.

If it dies before that, I might go for an X-Pro2.

 

Thank you all for the multiple replies, much appreciated.

 

Have a good day,

Regis

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regis, what will help sales the most is a much larger portfolio! About 5X what you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Regis said:

I think that I read somewhere that a Fuji manager said that in 2020 they will have a new one coming out, with a new sharper lens and better autofocus, and maybe weather sealing.

That's interesting, glad that Fuji continue to support this camera range. In case Fuji read this forum could we also have one with a fixed 50mm equivalent lens please? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most cameras have far more resolution than you need.

One advantage of higher resolution is the ability to crop.

I like to be able to crop a horizontal image to vertical format (and v/v) so extra pixels can come in handy sometimes.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Phil Robinson said:

Most cameras have far more resolution than you need.

One advantage of higher resolution is the ability to crop.

I like to be able to crop a horizontal image to vertical format (and v/v) so extra pixels can come in handy sometimes.

 

Phil, I just had a 🤦‍♀️ moment.

Yesterday, I uploaded a little over a dozen images, and only had one vertical that I shot and was happy with. I was wishing I had more. I know buyers can and do crop that way (I've had a few horizontals of 16MP shots cropped to verticals for 1/4 page magazine shots), but hadn't thought about doing it myself to make sure I had all my bases covered. With 42MP, I can double my shots when I forget to turn the camera on its side. And I can fill out that shoot. Duh! 🤦‍♀️ Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Regis said:

Hi there,

 

Yes I remember the Kodak DCS 200, was the first digital camera I worked with, as assistant in a big studio.

At the time it was more expensive than a car, and from memory, was around 1.5MP

It was attached to a computer because it could not save the images to a card...

And we felt like the kings of the world using it...

Probably because we were young...

 

Now about the Fuji X-100, I am not looking for a smaller camera, I just want one that I have fun when using it.

This is a camera that I really like not just for the small size, but also because it reminds me of the cameras that I used a few years ago, that had films inside. I am very happy with the quality of image that it produce, I was just wondering if having more MP would make a big difference in sales.

If it is not huge, I might wait for the new version.

 

I think that I read somewhere that a Fuji manager said that in 2020 they will have a new one coming out, with a new sharper lens and better autofocus, and maybe weather sealing.

So I will try to make my old one last a bit more.

If it dies before that, I might go for an X-Pro2.

 

Thank you all for the multiple replies, much appreciated.

 

Have a good day,

Regis

 

 

 

 

Regis,

 

Back in the day I had two DCS 460's (6MP CCD) retail on those was more than my Mercedes E 320............

One of my 460's was NASA flight certified and had flown on the shuttle.  It had modified software that allowed

it to do some special things,

 

I have a number of images on Alamy shot with the 460's.

 

In my opinion, the FUJI S-2 Pro was the greatest DSLR in it's day.  I still have two of them and a lot of the

digital images that I have on Alamy were shot with the S-2's.

 

At 100 ISO I still prefer the old CCD sensors, but the sensor in the NIKON D800 is great and D800's are

cheap compared to today's DSLR's. 

 

Chuck

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Regis, what will help sales the most is a much larger portfolio! About 5X what you have.

 

I know that, but I was just wondering if in a place like Alamy, the file size would make a difference.

For what it is, I am actually rather happy with the sales I got with such a small number of photographs here.

 

Thanks all for the replies, that was instructive.

 

Have a good day,

Regis

 

P.S: I nearly bought a Fuji S-2 Pro a few years ago, but at the time Nikon had just released the D100, and I went with it.

I liked it until I got a D2X.

But yes today, for personal stuff, I do prefer something like the Fuji X-100.

Just personal taste really.

Some people like stamps or old motorbikes or airplanes, I like cameras...

Lucky that I also use them as working tools.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Marianne said:

 

Phil, I just had a 🤦‍♀️ moment.

Yesterday, I uploaded a little over a dozen images, and only had one vertical that I shot and was happy with. I was wishing I had more. I know buyers can and do crop that way (I've had a few horizontals of 16MP shots cropped to verticals for 1/4 page magazine shots), but hadn't thought about doing it myself to make sure I had all my bases covered. With 42MP, I can double my shots when I forget to turn the camera on its side. And I can fill out that shoot. Duh! 🤦‍♀️ Thanks!

I try to take vertical shots that way in the first place, but I do often end up 'finding' a better vertical composition with a landscape shot, so it's useful if you have enough pixels to cut the ends off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said:

Regis,

 

Back in the day I had two DCS 460's (6MP CCD) retail on those was more than my Mercedes E 320............

One of my 460's was NASA flight certified and had flown on the shuttle.  It had modified software that allowed

it to do some special things,

 

I have a number of images on Alamy shot with the 460's.

 

In my opinion, the FUJI S-2 Pro was the greatest DSLR in it's day.  I still have two of them and a lot of the

digital images that I have on Alamy were shot with the S-2's.

 

At 100 ISO I still prefer the old CCD sensors, but the sensor in the NIKON D800 is great and D800's are

cheap compared to today's DSLR's. 

 

Chuck

 

Agreed - I've scarcely picked up my D3 since buying a used D800E, and will probably buy another shortly.

 

Alex

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.