Are we reaching the practical limits of trading off more mega pixels for less flexibility?

Here is a quote from The Digital Picture in their latest review of the 24 megapixel T6i Canon.

"A topic that should be touched on here is diffraction. Because the density of this sensor is so extreme, the image-softening effects of diffraction begin to be noticeable at aperture as wide as f/5.9. The softness increase is gradual and apertures considerably narrower will sometimes be desired, but the photographer needs to understand the cost vs. benefits for doing so. Here is an f/4 vs f/8 example."

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T6i.aspx

It's an interesting subject, and one of the advantages full frame cameras have over DX sensors. Given the same pixel count, a DX sensor will usually show negative results from diffraction a stop or two wider than a full frame generally speaking.

It's not always that simple though. What lens you're using also seems to play a part. There are also apparently other factors that I don't fully understand.

I'll give an example. The D7100 generally starts to show diffraction somewhere in the neighborhood of f/11 to f/16. OK, cool. The D7200 seems to behave about the same.

However when adding in a teleconverter, diffraction becomes an issue at a far lower aperture. I can only guess that this is due to the way teleconverters work (by magnifying the center of the frame, at least on a DX) and thus making it seem more apparent.

I noticed this with my 105 macro, which on its own doesn't seem to suffer from diffraction much at all at any reasonable aperture. Stick a TC on there and it's diffraction city, even at a calculated f/8.

If the Megapixel race continues, even the full frames will run out of the sharpest apertures.

The MP race is crazy.  I'd rather have a hi-qual 16 MP sensor with good associated electronics anf firmware than a 42 MP junky one.



Edit, that's a 2004 article.

Photo.net linky

Here's what seems to be a better and more current article.

I think that a lot of the sensor manufactures are starting to stop the megapixel race and are starting to focus on IQ and dynamic range.

I'll take insane stops of range on a sensor over pixels any day (thank you Sony).

I think it will become a real issue in the future without some kind of breakthrough.

This is pretty cool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0FXoWdHXTk

Interesting video. On my iPad, I couldn't see the results he was espousing.

So he says that Resolution always trumps diffraction?

If the only variable is resolution it would appear so. I don't think it's a perfect cookie cutter answer for every situation though, see my macro 2x above. But as a general rule I'd say he's on to something.

Oh hell yes.  Give me noise-free insane ISO.

ISO noise is already beyond amazing at levels that weren't possible just a few years ago. Dynamic range compression is still an issue as ISO rises.

I know you've read my ETTR thread (that seems to have slipped off into the archives)

Truth there, Zack.

The ISO performance, even on the same level, between the D200 and the D7100 is amazing.

And I'm trying to embrace ETTR, but seeing as how most of my shots seem to be in crappy light, and flash/strobes aren't really an option, it's that tradeoff between noisy, got the shot, and not-noisy, but everything's a dark blur.

Some noise will always be there. If it's too distracting make the picture black and white and call it artistic.