Sony has just announced a new 66.8MP camera, and it got me thinking, how many megapixels do you really need? 66.8 megapixels is madness, back in my day we were all impressed by 6 megapixel cameras, some people even said 6 megapixels was enough to match (or beat, my memory is foggy) 35mm film cameras.
There was a time when 6 megapixels was deemed the perfect resolution, plenty of detail, and low levels of noise, and that more megapixels would mean more noise, and worse images.
Then there was a time when 12 megapixels was deemed “all you ever need” the perfect combination of detail, and low levels of noise, good enough for printing to A2 or A3 sizes without issue. Any more would be overkill, who would need that? And noise would surely be an issue! (Nikon spent a lot of time famously saying 12MP was all you needed).
Then 14, 16 and 18 megapixel sensors came along, then 20 megapixel sensors, and then there were 24 megapixel sensors, and these were deemed the perfect resolution for everyone, lots of detail, low levels of noise, and you could print this as big as you want, how could anyone possibly want more? Perhaps you’re beginning to spot a pattern here…
Thankfully, the camera market now seems to have stuck with 20 to 24ish megapixels for MOST CAMERAS – look at entry or mid-level models (around $1000) and you’ll find 20MP cameras from Nikon, OM System, and others, 24/25/26MP cameras from Canon, Panasonic, Fujifilm and Sony.
Everything was neater when a certain number was “the standard” so I’d like to propose that for MOST people 20-24ish megapixels is good enough. (Like the ’20 is plenty’ signs near me, there’s plenty of detail, low levels of noise, and good enough for printing to whatever size you want).
Go to full-frame cameras, and you’ll still get 24MP options (Canon R8, Panasonic, Nikon Z5 II/ Zf etc). There are also 32/33MP options (Canon/Sony) – and 36MP DSLRs from Nikon. These all fit into the entry-level to mid-range, and even quite high-end full-frame camera options.
Go beyond this you get high-resolution 45MP full-frame cameras, even some 50MP cameras (Sony), with Sony previously topping out at 61MP (A7R V), which is surely enough for even the most pixel-peeping perverts out there.
But nope, Sony had to go one further, with the new A7R VI, with a whopping 66.8MP sensor… really? Does anybody really need that extra 5.8 megapixels?
Back when cameras jumped from 6 to 12, or 12 to 24, or 24 to 45 megapixels, you really did feel the benefit – you could crop into detail, or find extra detail in images that wasn’t there before… but an extra 9.5% more pixels (61.0 to 66.8MP) – is barely worth talking about.
Perhaps Sony were going for 67MP to join in with the six-seven craze that has been going around, but just couldn’t make it make any sense, like me?
It’s interesting that we haven’t been told we all need 45-50MP sensors, and how it’s the perfect resolution, but perhaps the costs involved in processing twice as much data became an expense that manufacturers could no longer pass (push?) on to the customer.
Perhaps sense prevailed after all? And hopefully this will continue… just because Sony makes a 67MP camera, doesn’t mean anyone needs to buy it…
The views expressed in this column are not necessarily those of Amateur Photographer magazine or Kelsey Media Limited. If you have an opinion you’d like to share on this topic, or any other photography related subject, email: [email protected]
Related reading:
- Forget megapixels: The one spec that actually matters in a camera
- Can we stop going on about megapixels?
- How much resolution do you actually NEED?
Follow AP on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok.
