 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / January 2007what's the best way to get more megapixels on nikon?
I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I bought mine when 6mp was the most i could get. But now I know there are cameras with more. My question is, is changing cameras the only way to get more pixels? It sounds awfully wasteful to me (I'm totally fine with the rest of D70.) Do they have a way of upgrading just the buffer capacity? Or other ways of upgrading from D70 without getting a new camera? Any info will be appreciated. Thanks. michael >I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > michael You are talking about UPSAMPLING. If you are working from a raw file, you can get slightly better results by making this adjustment. The resultant file will be larger. Convert to 16 bit. Save to PSD or TIFF format, not JPEG. You would do well to get in the habit of using a tripod if you intend to enlarge your images. The tripod will help you get very sharp images. Get the IR remote. Auto focus is nice, but sometimes manual focus will work better. Good lenses help a lot. mj_zh...@yahoo.com wrote: > I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > michael One option is to stitch a number of photos together, there are programs that make this pretty easy and once you are stitching you can go to very high numbers of pixels. Here is a sample that I did http://www.pbase.com/konascott/image/72258285/large you can hit original at the bottom of the photo to see the full 39MP image. The program I use to do stitch is PTGui, but there are others out there as well. As far as upgrading you camera to more pixels, sorry that is just not in the cards. Scott > mj_zh...@yahoo.com wrote: >> I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Scott PTGui is excellent. It looks like the new CS3 will be very good as well. Also look for Autopano. Impressive picture Scott. >I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > michael The number of MP is dependent upon the chip, not a buffer. Either the chip has the pixels physically embodied or it doesn't. It is one of digital's little nuisances--you have to continually upgrade if you want to remain near the top of the technology curve--and the price your current camera will fetch will be only a fraction of what you paid for it. >> I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to >> be able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > curve--and the price your current camera will fetch will be only a > fraction of what you paid for it. The alternative it film...where it just stays limited to roughly the same capability. -But that's about like saying "from now on, all writing will be done with chalk, since pencils give an unfair advantage, due to finer and finer tip-point technology." :)  SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > michael How large is "large format" printing for you? SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson Thanks to all for your help. This is really helpful. I am an artist making instllations/performances mostly. So I have wanted to document my work and since they become the only things that I can show after the actual work is down, I have tried to make the photographs as large as the content demands. That of course depends on the piece. But in general, I find that I constantly need to get close to 20"x30" size, which I believe needs about 15~20MP to hold without too much pixelation. Sounds like none of the currently available cameras have that high a resolution. But if the CCD is the part that determines the pixels, then it seems to make sense to me for the manufacturers to make that part interchangable? No? But back to the point, given that we can just swap the chips, I do find Scott's suggestion very intriguing and perhaps the closest to a professional solution to a large and detailed photograph. It also sounds quite natural after he pointed it out. Dah! To try things out first, could anybody suggest a good quality public domain photo stitch program to start with? Thanks so much. michael p.s., I just stumbled into making conceptual work with photographs lately and started to take lots of random shots. It warrents a really small pocket camera. And I was thinking in the same terms in that I was looking for super high resolution point-n-shoot, which invariably turn out to be with big cameras. But with this stitching alternative, I can really shop for small camera size now. Thanks indeed. > > I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: > www.pbase.com/markuson Thanks to all for your help. This is really helpful. I am an artist making instllations/performances mostly. So I have wanted to document my work and since they become the only things that I can show after the actual work is down, I have tried to make the photographs as large as the content demands. That of course depends on the piece. But in general, I find that I constantly need to get close to 20"x30" size, which I believe needs about 15~20MP to hold without too much pixelation. Sounds like none of the currently available cameras have that high a resolution. But if the CCD is the part that determines the pixels, then it seems to make sense to me for the manufacturers to make that part interchangable? No? But back to the point, given that we can just swap the chips, I do find Scott's suggestion very intriguing and perhaps the closest to a professional solution to a large and detailed photograph. It also sounds quite natural after he pointed it out. Dah! To try things out first, could anybody suggest a good quality public domain photo stitch program to start with? http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mbrown/autostitch/autostitch.html > http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~mbrown/autostitch/autostitch.html Great. I also checked out the other ones. Also, the new point-n-shoot canon I just got today came with its own photostitch program (it even has a 'stitch assist' mode!) Sounds like I'll be busy for a few days. Thanks for all the help. michael >But in general, I find that I constantly need to get > close to 20"x30" size, which I believe needs about 15~20MP to hold > without too much pixelation. Sounds like none of the currently > available cameras have that high a resolution. But if the CCD is the > part that determines the pixels, then it seems to make sense to me > for the manufacturers to make that part interchangable? No? What you really need is a medium format digital camera/back not a '35mm' DSLR. Check the Mamiya (22Mp) and Hasselblad (22 or 39Mp) systems... there are others too. These do have removable backs/CCD blocks with the ability to upgrade to a higher resolution when they become available... http://www.mamiya.com/cameras.asp?id=1&id2=2127 http://www.mamiya-op.co.jp/home/camera/eng/digital/zd/index.html http://www.dpreview.com/news/0409/04092902mamiya_zd.asp http://www.hasselblad.com/ http://www.hasselblad.com/products/h-system.aspx http://www.hasselblad.com/products/backs.aspx http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093003hasselbladh3d.asp You will require fairly deep pockets for these systems, BUT they do have an upgrade path, offer superb image quality and will use a variety of excellent lenses. Guy > <mj_zh...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1168469076.724000.284730@i39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > Thanks to all for your help. This is really helpful. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > determines the pixels, then it seems to make sense to me for the > manufacturers to make that part interchangable? No? Not an option, digital cameras are built around a chip, the only cameras to have removeable chips are the high end medium cameras and the Leica R8&R9. Look at $20,000-30,000 for a medium format camera, $10K for a leica setup with one lens. Too much is linked to the sensor, the image processor, software and basic design. Would cost more to switch out a processor than a new camera costs. If you are interested in the best photos you can get, get a good lens for your D70, a 17-55 f 2.8 Nikon or an 17-50 f2.8 Tamron (much less quality). If you dont mind single focal length lenses a 60mm f2.8 micro, 35mm f2, or 50mm f1.4 Nikkors all would serve you well, especially if you are stitching (less distortion). Getting more pixels in your camera would also work, a D200 would give you 10mp, in large prints that makes a difference. Wouldn't be that difficult to get a 20x30 from a D200 file. Again good lenses make a big difference. Tom mj_zh...@yahoo.com wrote: > But back to the point, given that we can just swap the chips, I do find > Scott's suggestion very intriguing and perhaps the closest to a > professional solution to a large and detailed photograph. It also > sounds quite natural after he pointed it out. Dah! To try things > out first, could anybody suggest a good quality public domain photo > stitch program to start with? If you are going to try stitching there is a free demo version of PTGui you can try. Also when shooting the photos it will work better if you get a fair bit back from the artwork and use a longer lens, a tripod would also help. You will also want to shoot in full manual mode to keep the exposures all the same. Make sure you give a fair bit of overlap between the images as this makes them easier to stitch. Scott No way to get more pixels from your present camera. You can consider photoshop plugins like Genuine Fractals Print Pro or some that use s-spline technology, which will allow much larger prints without blocky pixelization. It will smooth the edges but will *not* give you better resolution. It's worth considering that pixel size in a print is a function of the square of the total number of pixels--so a 12 Mpix camera like the D2x only gives you a print about 1.4x the size of your 6 Mpix camera before you get the same amount of pixelization. Toby >I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > michael > I am using a D70 with 6megapixels. For what I do, I would like to be > able to print without pixelation at as large format as possible. I > bought mine when 6mp was the most i could get. But now I know there > are cameras with more. My question is, is changing cameras the only > way to get more pixels? No. For example, if you have many (say 16+) shots of the same scene from the same point of view, you could try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Lamenessing_Engine Be aware that this needs a _lot_ of computer time for larger images, and there is no nice "I don't have to think"-GUI. -Wolfgang |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.