| Author |
Megapixel myth busted |
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
Without using better sensors the quality of a 7.0MP cameraphone won't be that much different from a 3.2MP so in a way the customer is being short-changed by this megapixel race.
Lets hope they wake up and give us better hardware.
|
|
|
Twometre
Joined: May 12, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Manzini, Swaziland
PM, WWW
|
All the things that are said here are those that once crossed my mind about these megapixels and at one point in time I wrote this: The camera satisfaction thread and I think that once this problem is solvec we will be able to find a phone that can be the answer to this thread
|
hanugro
Joined: Feb 28, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2008-01-02 09:26:12, max_wedge wrote:
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.
Agree to some degree Max. Hasselblad, Mamiya, etc have photosensor size around 4x5cm, same or bigger than K800 LCD. If someone ever allign many K850 5mp photosensor to match the size of the medium format photosensor then it may become (equal) few hundreds (100s) mp worth. Can it match 39mp medium format image quality? I bet my live it will not. Also those medium format can put high mp because they can without sacrificing IQ. Also because their lens resolution can preserve the detail. In fact in some dSLR community, many ppl questioning how many mp their lens can preserve detail. The idea is if you have a mediocre lens then the lens can't show more detail even if you increase mp.
Sensor technology will improve and it will be less noise with each generation. There may be days when we can get magnificent IQ with 12mp camera phone but we are not there yet. I just hope SE will get the balance right to get better IQ. |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
exactly. I think what those articles are getting at is that 6MP is about optimum for a compact digicam given current manufacturing ability. As techniques for sensor resolution (without noise) increase for small size sensors, that optimum 6MP will rise higher.
But for now, I think compact digicam makers need to focus on better quality sensors rather than higher megapixels. For example, if they want to keep making sensors smaller (for small form factor compact cameras) they should do it at the cost of megapixels and not at the cost of introducing more noise.
|
sadeghi85
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 341
PM |
On 2008-01-02 01:22:30, razec wrote:
I always use 2Mp in my camera when taking pics, 3mp if i wanted more details - i never use resolution higher than that.
No! always use maximum resolution. when you use lower resolution, the camera will take the picture at maximum resolution and then reduces it internally. so saving picture will be longer, and you can apply better downsample algorithm with softwares like photoshop. a 12MP camera still have smaller photodiodes than a 6MP(with same sensor size) so using 6MP setting on a 12MP camera will not bring better quality compared to using maximum resolution on a 6MP camera. so always use maximum resolution!
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).
yeah. for digital compact cameras 6MP is enough, for camera phones 3MP(photodiodes bigger than 3µm).
On 2008-01-02 03:37:04, Brightspark wrote:
afterall, the number of megapixels is quantifiable(obviously) whereas quality isn't.
exactly! that's why Fujifilm discountinued F30/31(6MP) and F40(8MP) and joined the megapixel war with F50(12MP). just read Dpreviewe's Fujifilm forum about comparing F50 with F30/31.
it's also far cheaper for them to increase the number of megapixels than it is to increase the quality significantly
nope! increasing MPs means creating smaller photodiodes(since sensor size can't be bigger) and needs newer technology. but why they bother themselves? exactly for previous reason, MP war(the fact that the number of megapixels is quantifiable and most people will choose MP over IQ)
and they can reap better sales as a result
they sales better because most people don't know what makes IQ better.
it's a win-win situation for the brands
and lose-lose for consumers(but they don't know!).
On 2008-01-02 04:51:40, hanugro wrote:
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.
no! not all. an obvious example is Plankgatan.
|
Sator1973
Joined: Jun 20, 2006
Posts: 242
From: Netherlands
PM, WWW
|
What about lens size and quality? A lens in a phone will always be tiny compared to a "real" camera. I must say, my K800i makes great snapshots, but I don't expect much more, neither from a K850i. And for snapshots, 3MP will do fine. For real good pictures, I still need a DSLR, probably for the next couple of decades. Also, picture-quality in small camera's is very software dependant, and there's not much you can do to improve the picture afterwards without reducing quality. So for me the phone-megapixel race ended at 3.2 MP for now. If you want more than just a snapshot, buy a DSLR, or even a compact camera, and if 5MP is good for you, you can get one real cheap these days.
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam |
Ranjith
Joined: Dec 07, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Saudi Arabia/India,Cochin
PM |
i only use 3MP with my 6MP DigiCam
and ive seen ppl these days buying 10 and 11 mp cams who dont even know what the features offer....they dont even know whats ISO!!
_________________
I Am A Dead Man....But Legends Live On.....
I  ESATO
 T20,T65, P800(2x),K800,Z300,  800, 850
[ This Message was edited by: Ranjith on 2008-01-10 16:32 ] |
CookiCrumble
Joined: Dec 18, 2007
Posts: 96
From: Oriental City
PM |
On 2008-01-10 17:29:01, Ranjith wrote:
....they dont even know whats ISO!!
Actually i'll admit i don't even know what ISO stands for or for what it means?
[addsig] |
Mizzle
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-01-10 17:48:36, CookiCrumble wrote:
On 2008-01-10 17:29:01, Ranjith wrote:
....they dont even know whats ISO!!
Actually i'll admit i don't even know what ISO stands for or for what it means?
OK, in short. The lower the ISO is the darker, but less noisy the picture gets, and the higher the ISO is, the lighter the picture gets but also noticeably more noise.
More about it here
|
CookiCrumble
Joined: Dec 18, 2007
Posts: 96
From: Oriental City
PM |
Thanks for that, and i'll learn more about it from the link you have provide.
[addsig] |
sadeghi85
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 341
PM |
On 2008-01-10 17:29:01, Ranjith wrote:
i only use 3MP with my 6MP DigiCam
Apparently you didn't read my reply to razec, two posts above yours. |
Mizzle
Joined: Oct 06, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-01-10 17:52:54, CookiCrumble wrote:
Thanks for that, and i'll learn more about it from the link you have provide.
No problem
This shows it quite good, too
|
Supa_Fly
Joined: Apr 16, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: Toronto, Ontario
PM, WWW
|
Mizzle ... that is a GREAT picture comparison.
I think that ISO is truely based on sensor & lens quality ... more megapixels, traditionally may have helped.
However against this threads title & arguement from first link provided ... I think those pro's that work for National Geographic would NEED higher megapixels and would come up with a quite reasonable & useful need for higher megapixels. Also those sports photographers that provide images for Sports Illustrated - and Swimsuit Issues  lately I'd SWEAR if I moved my head sideways I could see stuble .... a few more years and I'd swear that I could 'virtually' move the thong aside .
PS sorry ladies - that may participate in this conversation. |
sadeghi85
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 341
PM |
When you set ISO to high, camera will use some electronic circuits to amplify received light, so noise also will amplify. bigger photodiodes make less noise as they gather more light compared to smaller ones. because sensor size is limited in compact cameras/camphones, less MPs usually means better IQ. a nice example is Fujifilm F31fd(6MP, 1/1.6" see sample photos i hardly can see noise even at ISO800 !!!), unfortunately discontinued. you can find crazy prices for it on ebay.
those pro's that work for National Geographic use DSLRs, we're talking about compact cameras/camphones(sensor size is limited). |
Ranjith
Joined: Dec 07, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Saudi Arabia/India,Cochin
PM |
On 2008-01-10 18:46:09, sadeghi85 wrote:
On 2008-01-10 17:29:01, Ranjith wrote:
i only use 3MP with my 6MP DigiCam
Apparently you didn't read my reply to razec, two posts above yours.
great i never knew tht!!!!
tnx a lot man......
I  ESATO I W1i  T20,T65, P800(2x),K800,Z300,  800, 850 (2x),P1i(with WALKMAN) |
|
|
Posted: 2008-01-02 11:42
ESATO
T20,T65, 
800, 
