Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: which camera for 17" wide prints  (Read 7200 times)
Didymus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« on: April 02, 2010, 12:17:13 PM »
ReplyReply

I will be making 17" wide prints and I'm trying to decide which camera to buy.  The canon 5d mark II has 21mp compared to the nikon d700's 12mp.  I know megapixels are not everything but I'm concerned about print size.  I'm also aware of the other differences such as points of AF and exposure compensation.  Which camera is better for the size of a print that I want, Nikon d700 or Canon 5d mark II?

Thank you
Logged
tokengirl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 360



« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2010, 12:20:38 PM »
ReplyReply

If that's the biggest you will ever print, either one will be fine.
Logged
HarryHoffman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2010, 12:26:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tommyduarte
I will be making 17" wide prints and I'm trying to decide which camera to buy.  The canon 5d mark II has 21mp compared to the nikon d700's 12mp.  I know megapixels are not everything but I'm concerned about print size.  I'm also aware of the other differences such as points of AF and exposure compensation.  Which camera is better for the size of a print that I want, Nikon d700 or Canon 5d mark II?

Thank you

Or wait a couple months and see what replaces the D700
Logged

Didymus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2010, 03:37:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I've been checking for a D700 replacement and a replacement for either the epson 3880 or the 4880.  Thank you so much for your feedback.
Logged
jasonrandolph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 554


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2010, 04:26:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I routinely print 16x20 prints that came from my D200.  As tokengirl said, if that's as big as you're going to print, either one is more than sufficient.

More important than the camera is the selection of lenses you'll be shooting with.  If you don't have an investment in either system, then you're free to choose the one that appeals to you more.  But if you already have good lenses for one or the other, stick with the camera that will fit your glass.  Good lenses are much more important than a high-MP camera body to get fine prints.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2010, 04:30:42 PM by jasonrandolph » Logged

Didymus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2010, 04:46:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Thats another issue I'm wrestling with.  Evidently the nikon d700 kit lens (24-120) is not that great.  The canon lens is supposedly better but I can still go with the nikon and add other lenses later.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2925



WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2010, 05:05:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tommyduarte
Yes, I've been checking for a D700 replacement and a replacement for either the epson 3880 or the 4880.  Thank you so much for your feedback.
The 3880 is a relatively new printer ... don't think you will be seeing a replacement any time soon.
Logged

Didymus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2010, 05:06:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Will there be a replacement for the 4880?
Logged
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 02, 2010, 06:06:33 PM »
ReplyReply

To the original question, 12mp is enough to make a nice 16x20" or 16x24" print - assuming you use good glass and shooting techniques, and don't crop. Of course, if you don't use good glass and shooting technique, a 21mp camera won't really help you. What the higher-resolution camera will give you is a bit of breathing room to crop, or the ability go larger. For highly detailed scenes, the 21mp will give you a better 16x24" print, but that's not to say the 12mp print won't be good.
Logged

k bennett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1477


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 02, 2010, 06:13:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Proper technique is far more important than which camera you use. Unless you have *perfect* technique, you won't see any difference between the 5D2 and the D700 (or the 40D or the D300 or the K7 or the A900 or any other recent DSLR camera.) Even with perfect technique (which is exceptionally rare) you won't see the difference in a 16x24 inch print.

Good technique includes but is not limited to using the proper tripod, mirror lockup, proper focus, exposure, the quality of the lens used, etc. If, for example, you are hand holding your camera, then the camera is *not* the limiting factor in print quality.

EDIT: when I say perfect technique is exceptionally rare, I am talking about all camera users. Photographers who read this site are far more likely to have good technique.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2010, 06:15:03 PM by k bennett » Logged

Equipment: a camera and some lenses.
JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2010, 06:17:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tommyduarte
Will there be a replacement for the 4880?
That's a good question. I think some folks may be waiting/hoping for a 4900 that has the new inkset and print heads from the 7900, but I'm beginning to wonder if Epson will continue to carry two 17" printers in their lineup. They may feel that if you really want the pro-grade capabilities that are beyond the 3880, you should just go ahead and step up to a 24" printer.

Some might argue that there's has always been a 4x00 to match the 7x00, but that was before the 3800 created a new price point for 17" printers. Also consider, HP's 3100/3200 have been shipping for a few years now, and they haven't felt the need to ship a 17" model. Canon had the 5000/5100, which were popular due to heavy discounting that made them price-competitive with the 3800; but you'll notice there's no 5300 coming out along with the new 6300/8300 (not yet, at least).
Logged

Didymus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2010, 07:27:02 PM »
ReplyReply

I've worked with photoshop quite a bit but I mainly have a wet photography background so thanks for the help with the digital stuff.
Logged
GrahamB3
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2010, 09:18:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tommyduarte
I will be making 17" wide prints and I'm trying to decide which camera to buy.  The canon 5d mark II has 21mp compared to the nikon d700's 12mp.  I know megapixels are not everything but I'm concerned about print size.  I'm also aware of the other differences such as points of AF and exposure compensation.  Which camera is better for the size of a print that I want, Nikon d700 or Canon 5d mark II?

Thank you

I've used the Epson 3800 for the past 3 years. I routinely made 10" x 15" prints from my Sony a700 (same 12MP sensor as Nikon D300). Anything larger, I used AS Blowup to interpolate to 16".

I now shoot with the Sony a850 (lower fps Sony a900). There's no comparison in quality at A2 size between 12MP and 24MP. Obviously, less detailed scenes, or prints made on textured media are more forgiving interpolated. If you have a quality, detailed image, the higher native MP image will print better every time.

Graham
« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 06:42:17 AM by GrahamB3 » Logged
MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2010, 10:01:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I can easily tell the difference between 12MP and 20+MP landscapes at 11x14.  At 17 inches, it's a piece of cake.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2010, 11:17:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MatthewCromer
I can easily tell the difference between 12MP and 20+MP landscapes at 11x14.  At 17 inches, it's a piece of cake.

I don't think that's the question.  Are the 12mp prints unacceptable?
Logged
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #15 on: April 18, 2010, 03:13:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tommyduarte
I will be making 17" wide prints and I'm trying to decide which camera to buy.  The canon 5d mark II has 21mp compared to the nikon d700's 12mp.  I know megapixels are not everything but I'm concerned about print size.  I'm also aware of the other differences such as points of AF and exposure compensation.  Which camera is better for the size of a print that I want, Nikon d700 or Canon 5d mark II?

Thank you
For ultimate quality...

Do not use anything with an Anti-Aliasing filter.

Use an Epson printer @ 360 original camera pixels per print inch.

I expect you could buy a used MFB that would give you 360 original camera pixels per print inch on a 17 inch wide printer... but would this cost more than a new 24 Mpx DSLR? ... If you are contemplating Canon or Nikon, I presume that you do not hope to upgrade you camera without buying a set of lenses?

I think you would need about 30Mpx for 12 * 17 inches @ 360pppi, but if your budget would not run to that, you could use a lower res back and print at 240 pppi. You could print close to 17 inches at 360 pppi with a 24 Mpx camera, and it would be interesting to see 17 in wide prints
24Mpx pixel to pixel DSLR 9 (with border) along side
21Mpx scaled DSLR and
30Mpx MF pixel to pixel pictures.  

For 18 * 24 print I will use a Hasselblad H4D-60 and an Epson 7900 (with ColorBurst RIP), or 24 * 36 @ 240pppi... this kit is an order of magnitude or two more expensive, and I hope it will produce much better prints.

For panoramic 24" * 40 or more inches I hope to shift-and-stitch, and print @ 360 pppi.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 07:51:24 AM by Dick Roadnight » Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7888


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 18, 2010, 03:58:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

You may checks this: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.ph...xels-do-we-need

And perhaps also this:

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107619976
http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107823207

My experience is that 12 MP APS-C is good enough for A2-size prints. Going to 24 MP "full frame" produces much better files but the difference in print may be less overwhelming.

A2 is 16.5x23.4 inches.

Best regards
Erik

Quote from: tommyduarte
I will be making 17" wide prints and I'm trying to decide which camera to buy.  The canon 5d mark II has 21mp compared to the nikon d700's 12mp.  I know megapixels are not everything but I'm concerned about print size.  I'm also aware of the other differences such as points of AF and exposure compensation.  Which camera is better for the size of a print that I want, Nikon d700 or Canon 5d mark II?

Thank you
Logged

Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2010, 06:29:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

You may checks this: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.ph...xels-do-we-need

A2 is 16.5x23.4 inches.

Best regards
Erik

According to my calculations 23.4*16.5*(360^2)/10^6 = 50.038, so A2 @ 360 ppi needs 50 Megapixels.

...and 24 * 18 @ 360 needs 60 Mpx. ( The 60 Mpx chips have just enough pixels on the long side to fill 24")
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
JohnBrew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 758


WWW
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2010, 09:18:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
According to my calculations 23.4*16.5*(360^2)/10^6 = 50.038, so A2 @ 360 ppi needs 50 Megapixels.

...and 24 * 18 @ 360 needs 60 Mpx. ( The 60 Mpx chips have just enough pixels on the long side to fill 24")

I have NO trouble printing excellent quality 16 x 24 prints from my 10mp Leica M8.
Logged

chex
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2010, 09:21:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tommyduarte
Thats another issue I'm wrestling with.  Evidently the nikon d700 kit lens (24-120) is not that great.  The canon lens is supposedly better but I can still go with the nikon and add other lenses later.

Easy - don't buy the kit lens. If budget is an issue get the 35-70/2,8 if not then get the best you can. Or just get a few primes, sigma primes can be excellent and are cheap.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad