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="Paul - Herts" data-source="post: 1279581" data-attributes="member: 55947">I would second that, more pixels means more info so cropping could be applied more freely. Providing you are using good quality glass those distant birds would come closer. I'm using a 300mm on my 40D, sometimes with a 1.4x tc, and those extra pixels could give me better options. Adding the 400 f5.6 to the 50D would give a very mobile, sharp set up more than capable of delivering results - in fact I think I may have just sold myself on the idea! The 500mm f4 is out of the price range of many enthusiasts, but this alternative, IMHO, is a very viable option. Don't you just love the advances in digital photographyOn the other hand, without the need to crop - i.e. if you are shooting landscapes and the like - I would question the need for more pixels. I have never tried to get any of my shots printed above A4 size so don't know how far they would go, but I'd be interested to see what my 'best' landscape would look like at maybe 30'x20' - probably for the standards required by a home user this would be acceptable.Is there anyway of working out the equivalent pixel resolution that 35mm delivers?</blockquote>