BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pe'rigin" data-source="post: 1641986" data-attributes="member: 48320">There is a point when writing about pixel, pixel density and resolution is pointless. Unless ego is important.Judging image quality by pixels is misleading, because the defining conclusion has always to be the output device.This brings into play other factor totally out of the photographer’s control.You can argue until you’re blue in the face that your 7D image is sharper, cleaner than the Mk III, and it may well be so, but its meaningless on a web press printing at 10,000 impressions a hour on the equivalent of bog-roll. And that ultimately is how the image is judged.Most people on this forum will not get into what I call high-end printing, where colour accuracy is paramount, the majority of these images are taking on larger format cameras, be it film or digital, then heavily retouched.Life too short to get bogged down in anorak rhetoric, I would revel in the fact if I had a 7D, that I have not paid £4.5k for a MK IV, just to achieve the same image quality.</blockquote>