zhangyue wrote:
...As you can see, pixel is not free, it take disk space, it take time to process, it make me feel less pleasure to see higher noise at pixel level. It show me flaw of face and my focus error. 95% of time, extra pixel is useless to me but a burden. That is why I love M11’s 3 resolution mode so much...
Interesting, Michael.
As I wrote in my earlier post (p.9 #12), I haven't been interested in the greater resolution of the M10-R over my M10 or the still greater, 60 MP, resolution of the M11. For the high-contrast look that I like, I can print my M10 images at 150 x 100 cm (40 x 60 inches) without difficulty. I want what in films days was called the "35 mm aesthetic" and don't want to enter medium-format territory, even for my landscapes.
So, what I'm interested in is whether shooting the M11 at 18 MP could make it easier to achieve a gentler (more film-like) highlight roll-off than it is with the M10.
In the image I posted in p.9 #12, I underexposed by 3 full stops to protect the highlights, and then raised the shadows, and did some dodging on the highlights as well, to get the look in the highlights of the blinding light in the back of that frame. I probably could have gotten by by underexposing 1⅔-rds stops rather than 3 stops. I'm not sure that the M11 will give me anything better than what I can do with underexposing on the M10. But do you think that shooting the M11 at 18 MP, or even 36 MP, could make it easier to produce this type of result by need still less underexposure, say on ⅔-rds of a stop?
While I know that Michael (@zhangyue) knows my photography, perhaps it's better to show again the shot I discusses above as well as the type of landscape I was referring to for a 150 x 100 cm print.
M10 | Summaron-M 1:5.6/28 | ISO 200 | f/5.6 | 1/60 | Chiang Mai, Thailand
M10 | DR Summicron 50 | ISO 200 | f/4.0 | 1/350 sec | Wiang Pa Pai, Chiang Rai Province | Thailand
____________________ Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
