42 vs 33 megapixels, etc.

[Jimi3]

I got my trusty Sony a7rii right when it came out in mid 2015, so it’s ancient technology at this point, but it has served me well primarily for landscape work. I think, however, that it might finally be time to pick up something with more useful autofocus (eye af and tracking) for people and dog shoots. The a7r5 is out of the question price wise, but think the a74 would do what I need, and let me shoot some decent video too.

So, if I do this, I’m debating whether or not to keep the r2 for landscapes. What differences would I see if I swap it for the a74 - I’m assuming 42 vs 33 shouldn’t make a huge difference, right? I’ve made some 20x30” prints, but not all that often.

 

[wiltw]

42 MPixel computes to about 5300 x 7950
33 MPixel computes to about 4700 x 7050

5300 pixels vs 4700 pixels is a 12.7% increase in pixels per millimeter of sensor...that is a detectable but quite minor improvement.
265 vs. 235 pixels per millimeter of 20x30" print.

And that is all dependent upon your lenses delivering sufficient detail resolution to equal or exceed what the 42 MPixel sensor can capture!

 

[Paul Howell]

If you are shooting Sony or Sigma E lens, which last even the kit lens will resolve 42 MPixel, if you are shooting legacy lens with an adaptor you may or may not have a lens that will resolve 42MP. I have old legacy zooms that will resolve TriX but not PX, and nowhere near Tmax 100.

 

[faberryman]

I got my trusty Sony a7rii right when it came out in mid 2015, so it’s ancient technology at this point, but it has served me well primarily for landscape work. I think, however, that it might finally be time to pick up something with more useful autofocus (eye af and tracking) for people and dog shoots.

Are the images from your people and dog shoots frequently out of focus with your A7Rii?

 

[Cholentpot]

I got my trusty Sony a7rii right when it came out in mid 2015, so it’s ancient technology at this point, but it has served me well primarily for landscape work. I think, however, that it might finally be time to pick up something with more useful autofocus (eye af and tracking) for people and dog shoots. The a7r5 is out of the question price wise, but think the a74 would do what I need, and let me shoot some decent video too.

So, if I do this, I’m debating whether or not to keep the r2 for landscapes. What differences would I see if I swap it for the a74 - I’m assuming 42 vs 33 shouldn’t make a huge difference, right? I’ve made some 20x30” prints, but not all that often.

I take photos for a living...sometimes...And I'm still packing a EOS 6D MK1 as my second shooter. Primary is a 5D4 that'll need to be replaced soon. I've never really found the megapixel count to make a difference. Once I got to 18mp it was good enough for everything.

 

[Jimi3]

Are the images from your people and dog shoots frequently out of focus with your A7Rii?

Portrait shots of people are fine, though eye af would be a nice improvement. With dogs, which I’m hoping to do a lot more of, tracking them with the r2 has been pretty lousy. Even for more static shots, trying to focus on an eye and recompose can result in some missed shots.

 

[Jimi3]

Yeah, I actually might hang onto the a7r2 for a couple reasons in addition to the megapixel difference…I still like to use some of the now-discontinued apps, like the image averaging Smooth Reflections, for landscapes. Then there’s the fact that it’s pretty beat up at this point and I probably wouldn’t get much money for it. I never felt the need for a backup camera, but if I end up doing more paid shoots, that would be good too….

 

[faberryman]

Portrait shots of people are fine, though eye af would be a nice improvement. With dogs, which I’m hoping to do a lot more of, tracking them with the r2 has been pretty lousy. Even for more static shots, trying to focus on an eye and recompose can result in some missed shots.

Autofocus first came on the scene in the late 1970s and camera manufacturers are still sorting it out.