Does mega pixal = to quality picts?
- Thread starter melvin
- Start date
- Status
megapixel is one factor in quality, but an increase in megapixel count has to be matched with good processing of the megapixels (in terms of colour, sharpness, noise, dynamic range), and with quality lenses, proper exposure, proper stability of the camera, etc... if everything else is constant (and they never are), then more megapixels does mean better quality... on the other hand, does your final output require so many pixels?...
at the cost of an image that is noisy, has bad colour, or is very soft?... I have printed 8R and larger from my old camera (there was one print which was printed at 1.6m x 1.8m for a shopfront, which was cropped from the original image so its less than 4Mpixel... and from its expected viewing distance it looked just fine), a 4Mpixel camera (an Oly E10), because the images taken were sharp and well exposed, and the camera has an excellent lens...
yes the E-10 had a razor lens, since it's not unmountable =p. Can only be used at low ISO the pics were great!at the cost of an image that is noisy, has bad colour, or is very soft?... I have printed 8R and larger from my old camera (there was one print which was printed at 1.6m x 1.8m for a shopfront, which was cropped from the original image so its less than 4Mpixel... and from its expected viewing distance it looked just fine), a 4Mpixel camera (an Oly E10), because the images taken were sharp and well exposed, and the camera has an excellent lens...
I wonder if the released cameras with fixed lenses that and you would have to buy different cameras to get different focal lengths. that would be interesting.
I think it's "pixel" and not "pixal".
Other than that, it's kinda what we all already know...
can... get a medium format camera lens, and mount variously on a cropped frame sensor DSLR, a non-cropped frame sensor DSLR, and a medium format camera with digital back... but very expensive method at the moment...
personally, i think size of sensor chip also a very important factor. A 22mp file from a Phase one still looks better to me than a 1dsmkiii due to a seemingly wider dynamic range, more gradation from shadow to highlights. Maybe i'm wrong, but seems like that to me.
its not just the sensor size... phaseone claims that their processing workflow is 16bit whereas most DSLRs are in 12bit and some newer DSLRs might have 14bit... this might be the reason for the smoother gradations (although today's medium format back's high ISO quality has not developed to the state as those in 35mm format DSLRs... horses for courses)...
many factors to quality than just megapixels...
Hi theRBK,
I don't really understand what you mean. Could you explain a little more?
I've done crops of images that were neither noisy, with bad colour or soft.
The content of an image can sometimes (often) be more important than technical quality. In such cases, having more pixels to play with in PP can help lessen the quality loss when cropping or blowing up.
what I mean is that for there to be an increase in megapixel count resulting in an increase in image quality, the quality of the signal from the imaging chip would need to be good as well... that is, the increase in megapixel count should not come at the expense of noise, dynamic range, etc. and should be within the imaging resolution of the lens... if the other factors are not diminished with the increase in megapixel count, sure, more is good... but if the current technology does not allow for it, then more megapixels may not give us a better image... of course, technology is not a constant, and who knows what is available in the future...
I understand now. Like when I upgrade my 3+ year old 6MP D70 to a new 12MP D300what I mean is that for there to be an increase in megapixel count resulting in an increase in image quality, the quality of the signal from the imaging chip would need to be good as well... that is, the increase in megapixel count should not come at the expense of noise, dynamic range, etc. and should be within the imaging resolution of the lens... if the other factors are not diminished with the increase in megapixel count, sure, more is good... but if the current technology does not allow for it, then more megapixels may not give us a better image... of course, technology is not a constant, and who knows what is available in the future...
The original post was about shooting at less than the maximum pixel setting of the camera (e.g. 6MP camera setting to 3MP images).
for the first part of the quote, yes it is talking about shooting with less than maximum pixel count... but the second part of the quote and the links seems to talk about the maximum pixel counts of cameras...I understand now. Like when I upgrade my 3+ year old 6MP D70 to a new 12MP D300
The original post was about shooting at less than the maximum pixel setting of the camera (e.g. 6MP camera setting to 3MP images).
if talking about the first part, then I think it is abit wrong... shooting at the camera's maximum resolution in RAW mode would give the best quality... the usage of the file later on might not require the resolution, and greater storage may be required, but those factors certainly do not impact on best possible quality from the camera...
Mine is more a assumptious summarily conclusion base on average technology, most brands and experiences rather than a detailed argumentative description which can lead to.......
It's just like concluding whether Canon is better than Nikon, there's just got no absolute answer, it depend very much on many factors.
By the way there'S such things called EFFECTIVE PIXELS.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=Effective_Pixels
er... can lead to what?... if a summary conclusion with the assumption that noise level and per pixel quality would be equal no matter the pixel density, then sure, more pixels is better... but that is not a realistic assumption is it...
effective pixels in camera jargon means the pixels that are used to form an image (as opposed to some which are not active in the image forming process), not the quality of the image from the pixels...
- Status
Similar threads
