|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
|
![]()
Today's NYT has an article by David Pogue describing the results of some recent tests he did (first test was described HERE) to see how many ordinary people could tell the difference between various megapixel resolutions. Good read for people wondering about the relevance of more versus fewer megapixels when choosing a camera.
|
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
David Pogue is popular because he's outrageous, not because he's right.
This has been discussed in the topicMega Pixelson this forum. What Pogue did was use a 13MP camera to create the same image at 3 different resolutions supported by the camera. What he showed was that a 13 megapixel camera can make good prints at a variety of settings. What he didn't show was how different cameras with different numbers of megapixels can create images of the same or different quality. The image he used in his test didn't contain any areas of high detail or high contrast where the advantages of a high megapixel camera over a low megapixel camera would have been apparent. I use both a Konica-Minolta Maxxum 5D (6.1MP) and a Nikon CoolPix 880 (3.2MP), and almost every time, I can tell the difference between images shot with one or the other. And that'sat 8 x 10 , not 16 x 24 as Pogue did. I've caught Pogue in mis-statements and oversimplifications before. When he responds, he'll conceed my argument but maintain his original point. Just because someone has a soapbox doesn't meant they're right about everything. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
|
![]()
You obviously saw the first article, not the second one (?) with the retest. You're right about shooting with different cameras--and he mentions the same point, but he deliberately defends his method since he's looking strictly for the effect of megapixels, not the effect of different cameras with their different lenses, sensors, circuits, etc. He also admits the advantage of more megapixels for cropping purposes, but his main point about the appearance of photographs with different megapixel resolutions is well taken, since his audience is the uninformed consumer, who tends to think that any camera with more megapixels is "better."
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 851
|
![]()
Wrong is still wrong.
He proved nothing because he did not use different cameras with different MP sensors. The results would have been totally different if he had - and he also needed to use a subject that would benifit from higher MP - ie: one with a lot of fine detail. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
|
![]()
amazingthailand wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
What Pogue showed was that a 13MP camera can make great 5MP images. That's not the same as showing that a 5MP camera can make images that are as good as those made by a 13MP camera. So he didn't "isolate the effect of megapixels alone."
In order to do that, you would take a picture at 13 megapixels, and then zoom out, take a second picture at 13 megapixelsand crop it so that the resulting imageis 5 megapixels. Even if you spent the time and effort to do that, any variations in the lens at different focal lengths would still affect the resulting image. THAT is the only way to test the importance of Megapixels. He didn't do that. Andtheimage he used was still low in detail and contrast. Under those circumstances, I can usecrayons to make an image that's as good as a 13MP camera. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 59
|
![]()
There's an article in cnet, "More megapixels, better photos: Fact or fiction?" By Stephen Shankland, which covers similar ground. It's dated 2/6. Try
http://news.com.com/More+megapixels%...tml?tag=cd.hed |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 824
|
![]()
TCav wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
|
![]()
I have no problem with the method. He was comparing the difference in pixels with the same camera and lens, not doing a camera test.
I can see the difference between a 13 X 19 done with a 5Mp and a higher MP camera. The largest crop you can get from a 5Mp camera in 4:3 format rounds up to 135 PPI for a 13 X 19. The largest 16 X 20 you can get from a 5Mp image is 120 PPI, and that is probably lower in 3:2 format since you have to crop the long edge. So he is saying you can't see any difference in prints using over 120 PPI. I think most experienced people would disagree with that. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
Norm in Fujino wrote:
Quote:
So, it's not necessarily "Good read for people wondering about the relevance of more versus fewer megapixels when choosing a camera", especially the people that frequent these forums. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|