Most wanted stuff for landscapers. A 40mp camera and an ultra sharp 14-24

[Ben_Egbert]

The big want for me is a 40+ mp camera and a sharp 14-24 lens. The camera does not need speed, fancy AF or even a 1-series body. A large detacahble view screen woule be nice. Even a wireless remote option.

[shoot_ric]

How big do you print?

[Ben_Egbert]

I print up to 16 x 30. 

[Peter]

---

@Ben_Egbert wrote:

I print up to 16 x 30. 

---

so...why do you need 40mp?

[Ben_Egbert]

The ultimate goal is 300ppi which for 20x30 actually needs 54mpixels. But I will settle for as much as possible. 

I would trade some pixels for more DR and cleaner pixels. 

I can't get to 20x30 with my current printer, but I can get to 16 x30. The 30 is the chalange. My 1DS-mk3 only supplies 170ppi for that dimension. 

[Peter]

---

@Ben_Egbert wrote:

The ultimate goal is 300ppi which for 20x30 actually needs 54mpixels. But I will settle for as much as possible. 

I would trade some pixels for more DR and cleaner pixels. 

I can't get to 20x30 with my current printer, but I can get to 16 x30. The 30 is the chalange. My 1DS-mk3 only supplies 170ppi for that dimension. 

---

I still don´t understand why you need so many pixels. 10 mp works great for 70 x 100 cm.

[Ben_Egbert]

Guess it all depends on your standards. I have printed at least 100 large prints. They look ok, but I want better. 

Its not either or, I can have more pixels, you can have less. Plenty of lower pixel cameras around, but for Canon, 22mpix is the current max.

I guess I have to wonder at your concern? In fact, more pixels is the only reason I would upgrade. There are no other sufficient reasons. I have a 1DS-mk3 so it would need to be a major increase. 240PPI us what I get now at 24 inches. I would need enough to get that levelat 30 inches to upgrade.  

[kiboost]

Indeed, I also print large fine-art prints for art galeries, and I need more mp for better/bigger prints.

I still use 1DsII because nothing in Canon camps make me wanting to change it. Going Nikon D800e is an option but I wait to see what Canon will do in this department (I won't wait for years anyway ...). MF isn't an option due to price and versatility.

For those saying we don't need more pixels for large print, please stop this. Or print a 16mp file and 40mp file large and open your eyes. Even if we don't have more pure resolution (which we will have with new vII lenses, easily), doesn't having to enlarge to print will allways be beter (pixelisation, artefacts, etc etc).

What would really rocks (for me, nearly 80% of time on tripod, landscape and studio) :

- 36 or 40mp, no AA filter (or very weak).

- better shadow noise, no banding.

- slow speed, high DR !! I don't care fps at all.

- low native iso (iso 12, 25, 50, 100). Don't care iso 200 and more.

- 100% viewfinder of course.

- high quality live view/LCD at 100%.

- integrated grip (even smaller one) : better handling, squary L bracket for same framing v/h, no vibrations due to added grip, etc etc.

- anyway, a 5DIII AF would be nice, for when we need it. Fast shutter lag would also be nice (studio etc), 5DIII shutter lag/sounds is really toyish !

Let's see what happens !

[Ben_Egbert]

good answer, that the camera I want too.

[Jeffrey]

We do not need more pixels, just cleaner ones with better DR.  I've got 23 x 37" prints from my 1Ds that are fabulous.  At that size the viewing distance is further, so printing at 200 dpi is adequate.  Many very famous photographers print large at 200 dpi.  Too many people are hung up on believing that more is better.  No, more important is the quality of the original capture and how the image is worked and printed.   I use the 1DsIII now and can't find any reason for a higher pixel count.