Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 28, 2003, 8:54 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4
Default Megapixels

Just a simple newbie question:

Hypothetically, If I have two cameras with different mega pixels but resize the pictures to the same size for a printout. Which Picture will be better the one with the higher megapixel number or will they be the same?
mgaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 28, 2003, 9:39 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 148
Default

The old rule of thumb is the more MP you have the better you will be able to crop the pix and have a good size file to work with when you make the print.Now if you are going to make a small print such as 4x6 5x7 you dont HAVE to have that big of MP,But if you are going to do 8x10 or 11x17 and so on then it helps to have that 4/5/or 6 MP camera. The best thing i can say is that if you dont need all that MP then DONT pay for it.In most cases this MP# thing has turned out to just be a big game of who can have the bigest # and i have more than you do kind of thing,and the public is just eating this stupid game up.Please remember this just what i think.Tealblue
tealblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2003, 11:22 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

mgaron - What tealblue says is correct, in a basic way, assuming you can actually use MP as some sort of linear, accurate method of quantifying the detail a camera can resolve. Unfortunately, this is NOT the case in all circumstances. Fuji has a couple of 3mp cameras with unusual sensor toplogies that can resolve as much as some 4-5mp cameras in application. Foveon makes sensors that can resolve twice what the 'mp' specificaiton would lead you to believe. On top of this, the specific post process methods and viweing distance will have a HUGE impact on how large you can print an image.


-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28, 2003, 11:30 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WmAx
mgaron - What tealblue says is correct, in a basic way, assuming you can actually use MP as some sort of linear, accurate method of quantifying the detail a camera can resolve. ...
If all else is equal (it never is), the linear resolution changes by the square root of the pixel count.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2003, 3:12 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Marc H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 130
Default

The camera's megapixel count says NOTHING about image quality. Every part of the camera has to be good to produce good quality images, and just having a high pixel count is just not enough. The in camera processing, the lense, and the CCD/CMOS chip have to work together to produce the best images.
Marc H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2003, 7:12 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

Are you seriously saying that a 0.0768Mp camera (320x240) can produce images capable of being printed at 20x24"? When viewed sober at a distance of a few feet?

I agree that pixel counting is overstated, but to say it has nothing to do with image quality is at least as silly.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2003, 7:40 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Marc H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 130
Default

I meant to say that just looking at pixel count as a base for image quality is stupid.

If you would compare a 3mpix shot with an old Canon D30 Digital SLR (with a capable lens) with a photograph taken with the new Sony 828 or the fuji s5000/s7000 i honestly believe that the quality of the D30 wil be better. I agree that the canon photo will miss some fine detail due to the lower pixel count, but the color tone, noise and the depth of field of the image will be better, even if the sony/fuji image is resized to the size of the canon.

A lot of people people see the megapixel count as an index for quality an thats just plain wrong.
Marc H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2003, 9:58 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 148
Default

DID anyone notice i didnt use the word QUALITY when talking about MP size??????????.I will let the Pros in this group talk about that.Tealblue
tealblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2003, 10:58 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 205
Default

Marc H - What you say may be true in some cases, but in some..... it will not be true. At low ISO settings on many consumer cameras, the noise is controllabe, and can be virtually emliminated with software. You can get superior results for enlargement, assuming that the consumer camera in questino has signficnalty higher measured resolution. You can even correct the geometric lens distortions easily now, with free sofware such as PT Lens that automaticly looks at the EXIF data for the focal length of a particalur camera's image and applies the correction. At high ISO settings and for AF time, DSLRs clearly win, even the older units skuch as D30. You also have the optino of using very high quality lenses on a DSLR that can virtually eliminate CA problems on high contrast scenes. However, CA is not always problem if you carefully underexpose high contrast images that can be correctd in post process, in many cases.

-Chris
WmAx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2003, 3:11 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Marc H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 130
Default

Please, don't make this a D-slr vs. "consumer" digital camera discussion


Quote:
Originally Posted by WmAx
Marc H - What you say may be true in some cases, but in some..... it will not be true. At low ISO settings on many consumer cameras, the noise is controllabe, and can be virtually emliminated with software.

By using software to remove noise (like neatimage), you also remove fine detail.

You can get superior results for enlargement, assuming that the consumer camera in questino has signficnalty higher measured resolution.

true

You can even correct the geometric lens distortions easily now, with free sofware such as PT Lens that automaticly looks at the EXIF data for the focal length of a particalur camera's image and applies the correction.
At high ISO settings and for AF time, DSLRs clearly win, even the older units skuch as D30. You also have the optino of using very high quality lenses on a DSLR that can virtually eliminate CA problems on high contrast scenes. However, CA is not always problem if you carefully underexpose high contrast images that can be correctd in post process, in many cases.

-Chris
Off course you can correct a lot in post process, but getting it right at once is much better for quality and saves time/money. I used the D30 only as an example for obvious reasons, its a well known excellent camera, with a relatively low pixel count.

But sometimes i see offers of "no name" camera's with 4 megapixels or higher, at prices you would expect to pay for a good quality 2mpix camera. When you look at pictures made with those camera's you quickly see why the're so cheap, bad quality optics, and sometimes even software interpolation to increase the pixelcount.

The pixelcount is just one of the many factors to consider when you buy a camera, but image quality is much more important than the raw number of pixels a camera can produce, It is just a factor, just as all the other differences between digital camera's.
Marc H is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:22 AM.