One again from London, UK.

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

A bit about photography. This picture was taken with a camera with 10 megapixels in August 2008 in London. An APS-C camera and a lens of 10-20mm at 20mm and aperture of 11, ISO 100. Have the cameras of 24mp today and higher really improved that much on the final outcome? Or is GAS what is driving us all, as the industry has to come up with news as to survive?

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

View attachment 18039
A bit about photography. This picture was taken with a camera with 10 megapixels in August 2008 in London. An APS-C camera and a lens of 10-20mm at 20mm and aperture of 11, ISO 100. Have the cameras of 24mp today and higher really improved that much on the final outcome? Or is GAS what is driving us all, as the industry has to come up with news as to survive?

Lovely image. As to have modern cameras given improved results, I would say only in certain fields of photography. I have a Pentax K10D from 2006 which I bought second hand last year, and image quality is just fine for loads of things.

I think the limiting factors for me with that camera are primarily high ISO is not great, and the AF isn't as reliable as my newer gear.

Oh, and I think MP count is kind of starting to loose significance a bit. Even in camera manufacturer's marketing materials. For me 24MP is the sweet spot, as there's room to crop a fair bit when needed, but otherwise 12 is all I need.

 

[Ralph Turner]

It’s surprising what can be achieved with a relatively modest pixel count. I had an A2 sized print made from a pic taken on my old 8MP Canon 350D and Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro which now hangs over my Mum’s mantelpiece. It’s crisp and lacks nothing at normal viewing distance.

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

Yes, it goes to show that it is not the mp that really counts.