The Reality of the "Crop Factor"

[Dave Throgmartin]

50 MP will require the very best of lenses. It'll be worth it for the super user who has the best of the best lenses, but not so much for the typical user IMHO.

Dave

[HDNitehawk]

50 MP will require the very best of lenses. It'll be worth it for the super user who has the best of the best lenses, but not so much for the typical user IMHO.

Dave

Whatever a typical user is you are probably right.
The same is true of taking advantage of any resolution advantage the 7D II has. Camera shake, bad lenses, poor lighting and other things take the advantage away.

[Kayaker72]

50 MP will require the very best of lenses. It'll be worth it for the super user who has the best of the best lenses, but not so much for the typical user IMHO.

Dave

True...to get absolute optimum performance or for those cropping heavily. I am not one of those that wants a high MP sensor camera. Mostly, I am would not look forward to the file size and would absolutely be reaching the point of diminishing returns, IMO. But even for most photographers, compressing a 50+ MP image to useable ranges (web pages, 8x10, 16x20 prints, etc) would have benefits such as helping reduce noise, give better resolution, etc. Also, there are a number of affordable lenses that are among the best performers Canon offers especially when stopped down a bit.

I think the popularity of this camera, if it becomes true, will be a function of perceived need, cost, and image file size (of course, assuming features/performance are there). On the perceived need, I ran a poll about a year ago; 17 of 22 of those voted those the ideal number of MPs was in the 20-30 MP range.

Of course, that could all change if Canon blows us out of the water with IQ at a reasonable price.

[HDNitehawk]

On the perceived need, I ran a poll about a year ago; 17 of 22 of those voted those the ideal number of MPs was in the 20-30 MP range.

One of the rumors floating around is that the 50mp sensor will be the same as the 7D II, just larger. I think the key word for your poll was perceived. If the rumor is correct the resolution we are seeing with the 7D II might be close to what we can expect for a FF. A new question would be do I need that additional resolution benefit for the type of shooting I do. As well would I be able to take advantage of the increased resolution with the technique I use to shoot.

I personally can see a benefit for maximum resolution with wildlife, landscape, macro and architectural photography. Beyond that the current full frame offerings have enough resolution for any other types of photography I do.