Posted by Bonovox
I have a question which might seem a stupid one but I just want to ask. Regarding camera phones,why do we not see 4,6 or 7 mega pixels in camera phones?? I have seen this on so many cameras in the past but hardly see that type of mega pixels no more. But it would be good in budget phones instead of 3.2 mega pixels perhaps a 4 would be better I don't know. What's anyone else think??
Posted by skblakee
Man some time earlier this week I wanted to ask the same question. The race seems to have started at 1.3mp skipped 4,6, 7,9 and 11 and went straight up to 12. Now it seems to have settled on 5, 8 and 12.
Most new phones are 5, the BB Torch, IP4 and Samsung Galaxy S.
Posted by Bonovox
Yes I remember having a 6 mega pixel digital camera & once had a 4 mega pixel Nikon. Both gave good image quality. It would be interesting to see if any manufacturers of mobiles do this. A 3.2 mega pixel in a budget phone now is the norm but why not a 4?? Or a 6?? I do not want the camera phones to start going past 12 or 14 cos it's silly & not even dedicated compacts go over 14 megs now.
Posted by lukechris
Its because of resolution, thats why 1.3mp and 3.2mp are so specific. Should you have 6mp it would be distorted and would not look right.
And the reason for the jump, is the jump in technological times, thats how we got from 5 to 8 to 12 in such a short amount of time, competition.
Posted by Bonovox
These was taken on a 6 meg Lumix. I have had 4,6 & 9 mega pixel only cameras & I cannot see your point of saying it would be distorted
Do bear in mind Esato does make pics more distorted but it was a great camera @ 6 mega pixels
Original
Original
OriginalAll taken when I was in Hungary
[ This Message was edited by: Bonovox on 2010-09-11 23:31 ]
Posted by AbuBasim
There has been at least one camphone with an 'odd' resolution. The VK Mobile VK2200 (link) had 4 MP CCD sensor.
Posted by lukechris
On 2010-09-12 00:20:06, Bonovox wrote:
These was taken on a 6 meg Lumix. I have had 4,6 & 9 mega pixel only cameras & I cannot see your point of saying it would be distorted
The ratios of length and hight are standard
Posted by TTT
On 2010-09-12 14:02:15, lukechris wrote:
On 2010-09-12 00:20:06, Bonovox wrote:
These was taken on a 6 meg Lumix. I have had 4,6 & 9 mega pixel only cameras & I cannot see your point of saying it would be distorted
The ratios of length and hight are standard
12mp is 4000x3000. 9mp is used for 16:9 photos 4000x2250. But many DSLR cameras use 10mp for 16:9 photos, strange.
Posted by mriley
It depends a lot on the size of the camera's sensor
Posted by max_wedge
up until recently, most DSLR's have been 6:4 ratio (the same as film), whereas compacts are usually 4:3 ratio (the old desktop standard ratio). 16:9 is an option in many knew cameras on the market because it matches current desktop and digital TV standards.
Many new DSLR's are now supporting 4:3 ratio, such as Olympus, with an option to select 16:9 (usually at a lower MP because the sensor has to be cropped from 4:3 to make 16:9)
Posted by jplacson
It also has to do with physical sensor sizes that phone manufacturers define.
A 4MP sensor would be almost as big as a 5, so manufacturers that can fit a 4MP sensor, go for a 5 instead. 3.2 and 2 are almost the same, so manufacturers opt for the 3.2 now which has replaced the 2MP sensor.
An 8 slightly larger than the 6, so why bother?
I would much rather this dumb megapixel race end, and I'd rather have low-light/no-light capabilities than a 12MP sensor with a tiny lens!
With how small these lenses are, 5MP should be the max. Give me Nightshot, or a 12800 ISO setting instead.
Posted by max_wedge
I tend to agree on the whole. They should keep increase MP sizes but not so close to main stream digicams - for example 12-14MP is the current size of digital compacts - so 8MP is well and truly large enough for cameraphone.
8MP the size of a current 12MP would have less noise and better lowlight performance.
Posted by jplacson
Hey max, right? I mean I wouldn't mind having 12mp on my phone, but not if it takes worse shots than a 10mp point and shoot.
It just becomes a waste of storage.
Posted by max_wedge
I'd be happy with the same size pics (2.5-3MB), but a lower pixel count so that an 8MP sensor is the same physical size as current 12MP but with larger pixels (and therefore less noise) and less compression on the final jpeg.
Posted by AbuBasim
^^^ That's why I shoot with the interpolated 8 MP mode on my old i-mobile 902. It enlarges the photo before compressing it into a JPEG file. After downloading the photos to PC I shrink the photo down again to 5 MP and save with minimum compression in the JPEG. This way I end up with no artifacts. Pity that the white balance is so poor and the rest of the phone is crap - close to unusable
Posted by number1
I think the megapixel number the phones have is something to do with there screen res aswell, probley why there is only 1.3 , 2mp , 3.2mp , 5mp , 8mp , 12mp , where on a digicam you can get anything where your more likely to print them off and view them on a proper screen i have a 7.1mp canon ,also phone & digicam manufactures want to get the maxium megapixels than can on the sensor. if a bigger sensor and proper lens are used then the results are alot better i use a casio EX-Z1080 it has a 1/1.75" 10mp ccd sensor and some special lens, results are below.
Outdoor iso80
Oringal = http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/9773/cimg4545.jpg
mid light iso200
Oringal = http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/7470/cimg4515.jpg
lowish-light iso400
Oringal = http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/5583/cimg4501.jpg
Posted by mriley
Mega-pixels are a double edged sword, they give useful resolution if you want to crop your photos. But if lots of mega-pixels are crammed on a tiny sensor, like the ones on phones and compact cameras, then the sensor won't get a good signal and you will get noisy images at even the camera's lowest sensitivity.
Ideally the sensor manufacturers should aim to get the best quality in daylight conditions, with little noise, camera phones and compact camera's wont get good results in low light.