>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
General
> Megapixel myth busted
Bookmark topic
The folk at
www.6mpixel.org have come out with a pretty coherent argument against buying any camera over 6 megapixel. The reason? More megapixels don’t necessarily mean better image quality.you can read the full article here:
http://6mpixel.org/en/?
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 00:23:54
Edit :
Quote
i always made my pix even with digi cam in2 mp format, made maybe 5 times in 3 mp, over it its really not a must imo either
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 00:28:00
Edit :
Quote
I always use 2Mp in my camera when taking pics, 3mp if i wanted more details - i never use resolution higher than that.
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 01:22:30
Edit :
Quote
the figure is more like 3MP (ie there is no need to have anything above that unless you're a pro photographer).
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 02:53:07
Edit :
Quote
Well, I think the limit is on the size of each pixel in photosensor. The smaller it is (due to bigger mp but same size sensor) will be noisier.
MP need depend on how big you want to enlarge your picture. I say for 4x6" (4R) 1.3mp is just adequate but 2mp is preferable. 3mp can goes up to around 8R if you are not critical. I only satisfied with my 6mp dSLR for 8R and never print larger than 4R from my camera phone. This is from my personal experience.
There is no doubt that there is need for 40mp+ but it should be taken with medium format with the photosensor size bigger than your average phone LCD.
I hope SE concentrate more on other aspect of pictures and stop at 5mp. Would rather they improve on noise, dynamic range, stronger flash, optical zoom, etc.
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 03:12:36
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-01-02 03:12:36, hanugro wrote:
I hope SE concentrate more on other aspect of pictures and stop at 5mp. Would rather they improve on noise, dynamic range, stronger flash, optical zoom, etc.
i very much doubt that any of the brands will do that. it makes sense for them to focus more on increasing the number of megapixels whilst keeping a similar quality. afterall, the number of megapixels is quantifiable(obviously) whereas quality isn't. it's also far cheaper for them to increase the number of megapixels than it is to increase the quality significantly, and they can reap better sales as a result. it's a win-win situation for the brands. like i say, the number of megapixles is quantifiable, and numbers/quantities sell because they are concrete concepts that Average Joe can more easily understand when comparing various models.
if Average Joe goes down to the local mobile phone shop to buy a phone, which of the following is likely to get the sale, and which one of them is going to be easier for the salesperson to sell:
1) phone costing £245 with 12MP camera, bluetooth, CIF video, etc, but the camera is only of average quality (the salesperson merely needs to say "its good quality" because "good" can mean anything and he won't be lying)
2) phone costing £220 with 3MP camera, bluetooth, CIF video, etc, but the camera is of superb quality
?
[ This Message was edited by: Brightspark on 2008-01-02 02:43 ]
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 03:37:04
Edit :
Quote
On 2008-01-02 02:53:07, Brightspark wrote:
the figure is more like 3MP (ie there is no need to have anything above that unless you're a pro photographer).
indeed, DSLRs are the only cameras to be benefited with high pixel count. no wonder when we talk about camphones K850 has noisier image output than K800 although the former has a slightly larger sensor
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 03:43:56
Edit :
Quote
I think ppl will learn. When they try their new bigger mp cameraphone that turn out to produce more noise than their old smaller mp one. Now I hear less and less ppl asking when SE will make 7mp or 12mp camera phone. Guess more website (like the one in first post) will make ppl more aware of how digital/photosensor work.
Nikon's just release top of the line FF dSLR (photosensor size about half the size of K800 LCD) just 14mp. Canon's top of the line is around 18mp (it is due update this year so it is interesting to see whether they up the resolution again). Also Sony's own top of the line dSLR (inhereted from Minolta) is due release later this year (rumours say it is either 14, 16-18, 24mp)
I hope Sony's as co owner of SE (as opposed to Nokia which never produce camera) knows better. If I want to print a poster I would use dSLR. Just give me a decent 3-5mp that is usable (less noise) for indoor/shade then I will be happy.
[ This Message was edited by: hanugro on 2008-01-02 03:59 ]
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 04:51:40
Edit :
Quote
Two years ago David Pogue at New York Times posted about this topic on his blog:
The Truth About Digital Cameras.
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 09:16:16
Edit :
Quote
Preuming it's a high quality sensor then the bigger it is the more detail on the picture. Afterall why would hasselblad have a 39MP sensor? Their lenses (large format) need a large hi MP sensor in order to achiever the same result as film.
But for a digicam that will only ever print out 8x10 pics, then 6MP is way and enough. If that is your limit (8x10 or maybe A3), then you are better off with higher quality sensor rather than more MP's, to capture better colours, less noise etc.
--
Posted: 2008-01-02 09:26:12
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
