Author Topic: Jump to 12MP or 16MP DSLR worth it? (Read 10006 times)

PaulieWalnuts · « **on:** January 09, 2008, 18:22 »

Looks like Istock and maybe LuckyOliver are the only places where jumping to a 12MP or 16MP might make sense.

For those with 12/16MP DSLRs what percentage of sales are over 10MP? Do the sales justify the jump to a DSLR more than 10MP?

Phil · « **Reply #1 on:** January 09, 2008, 20:08 »

to my thinking, there are a number of other factors to consider as well, those higher mp dslrs generally have more features geared towards professional use, and hopefully better image quality as well. but then it comes down to whether those features are of use to you (I couldn't imagine using 8fps etc).

higher mp also gives more crop space which can be nice, had one pic at 10mp that put on stock then did two 5mp crops which I also listed as well.

michealo · « **Reply #2 on:** January 10, 2008, 06:16 »

A full frame sensor typical on larger megapixel dslrs will tend to have less noise which is also a factor

HermanM · « **Reply #3 on:** January 10, 2008, 23:23 »

In the ever growing trend towards suscriptions models it doesnt make sense at all. I have a 5D and hate to see my big photos being sold for several dollars in the morning and pennies in the evening at some sites... I'm talking about the same image on the same site... It simply isn´t right.

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #4 on:** January 11, 2008, 21:34 »

...... concur with above comments in this.. I'm going for a 5D to get the full sensor, more quality in the image fewer tech problems ... and the opportunity to be able to crop and still have a picture left...
plus... micro/macro isn't the end of the universe for many... I sell privately and want the ability to blow the things up the size of a living room or... a lobby wall.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** January 12, 2008, 05:12 »

i wanna know when the new 5D is coming out. Hopefully it will have at least 16mp

GeoPappas · « **Reply #6 on:** January 12, 2008, 07:56 »

Rumors are that the Canon 7D and Canon 450D are supposed to be released during the PMA show from 01/31 - 02/02 in Las Vegas.

leaf · « **Reply #7 on:** January 12, 2008, 08:30 »

lets hope its true

ParisEye · « **Reply #8 on:** January 12, 2008, 09:02 »

I read somewhere last month (but I can't find the reference) that Canon announced... that they would make an announce on january 24th. Which was surprising as they tradionally announce new cameras and lens on feb/march in Las Vegas or in such an opportunity.

But why 7D ? It should be far lower on the Canon scale which is traditionnally 1, 3, 5 with lower grades as 10, 30, 50, and still lower as 100, 300, and so on. So, as Canon just launched the 40D, the upper step should be 4D.

So, personnaly I would rather expect either a 5DmarkII (but why such a pre-announce if it's "just" a revamping of 5D) or rather a 3D (now I am droling).

Anyway, certainly 24x36, 14bits and 16Mpix

Any idea, the canonists ?

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #9 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:01 »

Some good thoughts so far but I'm wondering if it's really worth the extra thousand, or thousands, or dollars to get a 12 or 16 MP DSLR. Does anyone get XXL (12MP+) sales anywhere?

leaf · « **Reply #10 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:18 »

i am guessing that on a few sites people would just buy the biggest size - whatever that is.

I quite often get XL sales on fotolia (12 mp).. i would imagine that if i had 16mp images that those would be purchased almost as regularly. It would not rationalize spending the thousands of extra $$ but since a camera with that many pixels would also be useful for wedding photography and other jobs I get it would be a nice bonus for stock as well.

basti · « **Reply #11 on:** February 28, 2008, 10:08 »

Its probably not worth only because of microstock, but very reasonable for macrostock or midstock. With 48MB uncompressed required by Alamy, incredible sizes required by many other agencies its better to invest into really good body now and be ok next few years rather then spend next 2-3 years balancing with the minimum tightly passing camera.

Pixart · « **Reply #12 on:** February 28, 2008, 11:08 »

Below is something I posted a couple days ago about 10 mp, but it sounds like there isn't a lot of cropping options for a full spread magazine. And most sales for magazines would be extended license sales that you may be overlooked if shooting 6 mp. I would say larger does mean more large sales?

But, having more means more work in a way. Does BigStock still only take 10mb files? I have no idea how big are most 16mp files are? You will presumably downsample for them for BS and more for the subscription agencies... You will fill up a 4gb memory card in half the time. The huge raw files demand huge memory on your computer.

BUT.... I read a story once, can't remember the specific details but here is the gist.... some guy with really nice agricultural shots on the micros. A big company bought some for a campaign and thought they were good... but not perfect. They checked his profile and as it would be, they both happened to be located in the province and almost the same area. They found how to reach him through his profile, and engaged him to shoot more specific photographs for their business. A very good assignment, and he got a lot of commercial work out of it. I guess that part of my tale has nothing to do with megapixels... but if they wanted billboards and he was shooting with a 6mp maybe that is where their relationship would have ended. You never know where the micros will lead you.

Quote from: Pixart on February 22, 2008, 02:03

We often have discussions about megapixels. I found the paragraph copied below useful. If you would like to read the post I took it from, it's here http://www.photographybay.com/2008/02/19/10-tips-for-breaking-into-commercial-magazine-photography/

8. Use realistic equipment.

You don’t need a $5,000 warhorse to build an image archive you might use to sell 10 photos a year. But you do need a bare minimum. Most magazines publish in 270 dpi (300 dpi for artistic or glossy publications). At 270 dpi, a ten megapixel camera can make an acceptable two page (or “double-truck”) image in horizontal orientation. A six megapixel camera can handle one full page vertically. Those are the baselines. If you can afford ten megapixels, get them. If you can’t, don’t sweat it; they’ll be affordable any day now. Do not waste editors’ time with images made on a two megapixel point and shoot camera (publication of images like that effectively ceased three years ago). Don’t waste their time with ancient slides, unless you were especially good at slide photography.

sharply_done · « **Reply #13 on:** February 28, 2008, 12:46 »

Quote from: Pixart on February 28, 2008, 11:08

...
But, having more means more work in a way. Does BigStock still only take 10mb files? I have no idea how big are most 16mp files are? You will presumably downsample for them for BS and more for the subscription agencies... You will fill up a 4gb memory card in half the time. The huge raw files demand huge memory on your computer.
...

I shoot with a Canon 1Ds Mk II, a 17MP camera. JPG files are typically in the 5-8MB range. Although BS takes only 10MB files, 98% of my images are under this size. Instead of downsizing 10MB+ images, I save them at JPG quality level 10 or 11. Although filling up a 4GB card might be a concern for a client-driven location shoot, it is not a concern when shooting microstock. I shoot mostly in JPG mode, and use RAW only for the situations that require it (e.g. landscape shots with far-off mountainsides of evergreen trees).

XXL sales don't occur in enough volume to solely justify the extra cost of this camera. As I see it, the raison d'etre of this camera is to remove all technical barriers in making a shot. The white balance, focus ability, focus speed, noise level, and battery life are outstanding with this camera, and it's fairly obvious after using it that the manufacturer could easily provide this same performance in their lesser models.

The advantage of using this camera in the microstock market is the ability to downsize marginal images - shots that might be unacceptable due to noise, artifacts, or blur can be downsized to XL or L size and be accepted. The extra image room also allows for freedom in cropping - XL size square and panoramic images can be made.

Although the Canon 5D is nice in that it provides 12MP full frame images, and it appears that most people think this is the camera to get for microstock photography, it doesn't quite have the ability of a professional camera. You should get an advanced prosumer camera if you are on a budget and/or don't intend to take your photography past the part-time/amateur/extra income level. Get a pro camera if you intend to make your living doing this, and need to squeeze the most money out of every photographic opportunity.

Smithore · « **Reply #14 on:** February 28, 2008, 13:03 »

I use a canon 5D since two months and my acceptance rate is much better at IS (from 62% to 80% now), for the others sites near 100% acceptance (no big change), except FT who is lunatic sometimes.
It's interesting for acceptance ratio at IS and also XL size, also for cropping or reducing for SS.

Mormegil · « **Reply #15 on:** February 28, 2008, 16:52 »

More MP really help in that I can crop more, and can downsize if I end up with artifacting or something like that.

I agree the extra income from larger size sales doesn't come close to paying for the difference in price.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #16 on:** February 29, 2008, 20:46 »

Quote from: leaf on January 12, 2008, 05:12

i wanna know when the new 5D is coming out. Hopefully it will have at least 16mp

Well we know it's not Jan/Feb 2008?

I was convinced that something new was coming, so I didn't buy a new 5D. Not that saving money is something bad. Here's what we did get.

Quote

Replacing the EOS Rebel XTi / 400D, Canon has announced the EOS Rebel XSi / 450D, which is a 12.2 megapixel DSLR. Along with the Rebel XSi, Canon announced the availability of the EF-S 55-250mm IS lens for US customers. This lens was announced in August 2007, however, it was previously unavailable in the US.

On the “pro” gear side of things, Canon launched the previously announced EF 200mm f/2L IS USM and EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM lenses, priced at $6,000 and $12,000, respectively.

In the point & shoot realm, Canon announced the PowerShot A590 IS, A580 and A470 to update the popular “A” series digital cameras. Additionally, Canon updated the PowerShot SD1000 IS Digital ELPH camera with the PowerShot SD1100 IS Digital ELPH camera.

A590IS might make a nice pocket camera to carry everywhere, but other than that, nothing for me.

ptlee · « **Reply #17 on:** March 01, 2008, 02:39 »

Was having the same debate with myself. If I can find a good deal for a 5D I would go for it, otherwise it would have to be the 40D (would like to have the fps & AF for the kids and wildlife shots), and perhaps rent a 1Ds mk* occasionally for some stock shoots. $:-\$

basti · « **Reply #18 on:** March 01, 2008, 03:36 »

If we forgot about Canon 1D and Nikon D3 which are very very pricy stuff, Pentax K20D, Samsung GX20 or Sony 350 and Sony 700 could be very good. Unfortunately they are on the market too short to foresee how they will perform after 1-2 years.
Announced full-rame Sony cameras with 24MP and Sigma DP15 with large Foveon sensor could stirr the market later during this year. I think its too early to go beyond 12MP if you dont want to buy Canon/Nikon topmodels.

cphoto · « **Reply #19 on:** March 04, 2008, 15:28 »

Quote from: sharply_done on February 28, 2008, 12:46

Quote from: Pixart on February 28, 2008, 11:08
...
But, having more means more work in a way. Does BigStock still only take 10mb files? I have no idea how big are most 16mp files are? You will presumably downsample for them for BS and more for the subscription agencies... You will fill up a 4gb memory card in half the time. The huge raw files demand huge memory on your computer.
...
...
XXL sales don't occur in enough volume to solely justify the extra cost of this camera. As I see it, the raison d'etre of this camera is to remove all technical barriers in making a shot. The white balance, focus ability, focus speed, noise level, and battery life are outstanding with this camera, and it's fairly obvious after using it that the manufacturer could easily provide this same performance in their lesser models.

The advantage of using this camera in the microstock market is the ability to downsize marginal images - shots that might be unacceptable due to noise, artifacts, or blur can be downsized to XL or L size and be accepted. The extra image room also allows for freedom in cropping - XL size square and panoramic images can be made.
...

100% agree. I now shoot 1Ds MkIII and I can get all of my ISO 1600 shots accepted everywhere. I downsize to about 3MP with SS, and up to 8MP with FT. No more rejection for noise, artifact, etc, etc...

Also I don't have to upsize anymore to get my shots accepted with Alamy!

And finally I can print larger 30x20'', which for my landscape work is key.

So if you can afford it, just buy a Canon 1Ds, you won't regret it

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Jump to 12MP or 16MP DSLR worth it? (Read 10006 times)

PaulieWalnuts

Phil

michealo

HermanM

a.k.a.-tom

leaf

GeoPappas

leaf

ParisEye

PaulieWalnuts

leaf

basti

Pixart

sharply_done

Smithore

Mormegil

RacePhoto

ptlee

basti

cphoto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors