“Not real 48MP”?

Maybe in the purest sense, or according to current conventions, some would say that it is not truly 48mp, but as you show above, it is truly, very good.

I started a thread hoping to create a discussion about the MA2's best still image settings - as that is what I do most - and I have found that shooting manual settings, JPG & RAW, in 48mp mode, one click overexposed gives the best RAW file to work with, and I rarely keep any of the JPG's. It's still too early for me with this drone however, and I have not fully tested all of the photo modes to really know.

I don't understand why it only lets you select JPEG or JPEG+RAW vs only RAW mode. I don't see the benefit.

dronecrasher said:

I don't understand why it only lets you select JPEG or JPEG+RAW vs only RAW mode. I don't see the benefit.

Click to expand...

Agreed!

In good lighting, it is resolving more detail that the same sensor in 12 Mp mode. Compared to a true 48 Mp sensor with a full Bayer filter, it would look pretty soft. It is a 48 Mp sensor with a 12 Mp filter array.

Yeah I'm not a fan of it TBH, reminds me of the old fake DPI software interpolation on scanners in early days of computing (e.g. 600DPI optical, 1200DPI interpolated). Sony has also released a newer IMX686 sensor offering even more "unbelievable" 64MP out of a tiny sensor with similar setup and it wasnt much of an improvement.

Ice_2k said:

After my first test flight and a couple of test shots (albeit in good lighting conditions), it seems pretty real to me...View attachment 102285

Click to expand...

It should let you crop and retain the original details better because it does in fact have more pixels but it doesn’t result in sharper images at 100% because it can’t pick up more details than the 12 mp camera can. A true 48 MP camera would look better at 100% than a 12MP.

It’s basically a lossless zoom function and this is how that is done. Better than 12 mp, sure, but not as good as 48 MP.

dronecrasher said:

I don't understand why it only lets you select JPEG or JPEG+RAW vs only RAW mode. I don't see the benefit.

Click to expand...

Consider the JPEG a sample proof image, and the RAW/DNG the negative from which you can create many variations of the proof image. The included JPEG takes up a fraction of the space of the DNG, and offers many additional benefits, including using it as is, without any post processing.

brett8883 said:

It should let you crop and retain the original details better because it does in fact have more pixels but it doesn’t result in sharper images at 100% because it can’t pick up more details than the 12 mp camera can. A true 48 MP camera would look better at 100% than a 12MP.

It’s basically a lossless zoom function and this is how that is done. Better than 12 mp, sure, but not as good as 48 MP.

Click to expand...

I am sure you are right on the technicalities. But to my eyes, the OPs samples just look like enlarging with noise reduction - like how Topaz GigaPixel does it.

Ice_2k said:

Not sure why you say that... in the 12MP version you can’t really see the numbers but in the 48MP version you can clearly see each number.

Click to expand...

I am not saying the two are the same, nor am I doubting the 48MP has better resolution. Just saying wouldn't applying some enlargement+noise reduction+sharpening yield the same results (and yes, it is of course nice that the camera does all that in house)

GadgetGuy said:

Consider the JPEG a sample proof image, and the RAW/DNG the negative from which you can create many variations of the proof image. The included JPEG takes up a fraction of the space of the DNG, and offers many additional benefits, including using it as is, without any post processing.

Click to expand...

I do jobs that all They is want raw. So I use the JPEG’s to cull them. I can just look at them in preview and make a quick decision.

48 MP definitely has better resolution. There is no need to argue about it. For me, I am more interested in knowing how 48 MP compares with 12 MP in terms of dynamic range. The following shot is taken with M2P. This is a single-shot RAW photo tuned in Photoshop. For photos of this kind, dynamic range is a lot more important than resolution.

Doppler said:

I am sure you are right on the technicalities. But to my eyes, the OPs samples just look like enlarging with noise reduction - like how Topaz GigaPixel does it.

Click to expand...

Well that is somewhat what’s happening but there is additional data captured to make better interpolation guesses. You can actually see the polynomial artifacts in the 48 MP if you zoom in far enough. Probably Cubic or Bicubic interpolation.

This is only appropriate to see the processing that camera uses and isn’t an indication of quality or lack there of. I by no means condone pixel peeping to determine the quality of an image.

boblui said:

48 MP definitely has better resolution. There is no need to argue about it. For me, I am more interested in knowing how 48 MP compares with 12 MP in terms of dynamic range. The following shot is taken with M2P. This is a single-shot RAW photo tuned in Photoshop. For photos of this kind, dynamic range is a lot more important than resolution.

View attachment 102372

Click to expand...

You’re forgetting one thing the final resolution depends on the lens. If the lens isnt up to the 48 megapixels then you effectively don’t have that resolution.
And I’m willing to bet the circles of confusion for that lens are not up to that resolution.

Done said:

You’re forgetting one thing the final resolution depends on the lens. If the lens isnt up to the 48 megapixels then you effectively don’t have that resolution.
And I’m willing to bet the circles of confusion for that lens are not up to that resolution.

Click to expand...

You are not alone in knowing that lenses have resolution limits. The evidence put forward by the OP is pretty clear. 48 MP has higher resolution. May be it's not 4 times higher but it's higher.
period.

brett8883 said:

I by no means condone pixel peeping to determine the quality of an image.

Click to expand...

Whoa-- bite your tongue!!

boblui said:

You are not alone in knowing that lenses have resolution limits. The evidence put forward by the OP is pretty clear. 48 MP has higher resolution. May be it's not 4 times higher but it's higher.
period.

Click to expand...

Lol
So you think pixel keeping on a thumbnail mean something?
Very amusing.

Done said:

You’re forgetting one thing the final resolution depends on the lens. If the lens isnt up to the 48 megapixels then you effectively don’t have that resolution.
And I’m willing to bet the circles of confusion for that lens are not up to that resolution.

Click to expand...

Indeed, the lens at that resolution and aperture is beyond the diffraction limit.

brett8883 said:

Well that is somewhat what’s happening but there is additional data captured to make better interpolation guesses. You can actually see the polynomial artifacts in the 48 MP if you zoom in far enough. Probably Cubic or Bicubic interpolation.

This is only appropriate to see the processing that camera uses and isn’t an indication of quality or lack there of. I by no means condone pixel peeping to determine the quality of an image.
View attachment 102373

Click to expand...

Definitely some odd looking artifacts there. I have been playing with some demosaicing algorithms for Bayer sensors. I will have to update my program to explore quad bayer.