Nikon's Low megapixel range of Cameras Vs Canon High megapixel cameras


Jan 27, 2010
809
0
0
#1
Can anyone tell me why Nikon chose to keep the megapixel count low even on their d3 flagship model? its weird how canon keep increasing their mp count but nikon chose to limit it.

What are the advantages or differences of both camps? can anyone enlighten me?
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#3
Can anyone tell me why Nikon chose to keep the megapixel count low even on their d3 flagship model? its weird how canon keep increasing their mp count but nikon chose to limit it.

What are the advantages or differences of both camps? can anyone enlighten me?
read the D3 review and you'll know. Lower MP = larger sensors = much better low-light/high ISO capability. It's all a trade-off.
 

Jan 27, 2010
809
0
0
#4
wow thanks for the info.

If i knew about this earlier, i just might have got Nikon instead of Canon. But honestly speaking the low light capability cannot be that different if i use similar lenses with a good technique right?
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#5
wow thanks for the info.

If i knew about this earlier, i just might have got Nikon instead of Canon. But honestly speaking the low light capability cannot be that different if i use similar lenses with a good technique right?
Well.. you'd have to try it to believe it... :)
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#6
wow thanks for the info.

If i knew about this earlier, i just might have got Nikon instead of Canon. But honestly speaking the low light capability cannot be that different if i use similar lenses with a good technique right?
Depends on what you consider "low light" and high ISO. A Canon 1D Mk IV goes from ISO 100-12,800 as base, then several "boost" levels up to 102,400. A Nikon D3S will go from 200-12,800 base, and also boost up to 102,400.

But if you were to actually do SOME RESEARCH on your own and read a review, you can see how the performance is different:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmarkiv/page17.asp

"The larger sensor and lower pixel count of the D3S both help it to give a better performance at everything above ISO 6400."
 

Last edited:

nixontkl

New Member
Nov 12, 2007
585
0
0
Punggol
nixontang.multiply.com
#7
wow thanks for the info.

If i knew about this earlier, i just might have got Nikon instead of Canon. But honestly speaking the low light capability cannot be that different if i use similar lenses with a good technique right?
when u are max out, and forced to shoot at slow speed of 1/30 or even 1/40 for candid human shot. or even 1/15 or 1/5 for landscape shot without tripod and anything to rest against, u will appreciate the ability to pump up the ISO and drop the shutter speed.

sometimes good technique doesnt help if your shooting subject is moving, to stop your subject from moving in the case of human 1/40-1/60 is abt the slowest speed u can use without having motion blur caused by the subject moving.

moi 2cents
 

wildcat

Senior Member
Sep 8, 2004
3,268
1
0
Bedok
#8
wow thanks for the info.

If i knew about this earlier, i just might have got Nikon instead of Canon. But honestly speaking the low light capability cannot be that different if i use similar lenses with a good technique right?
Well, that's one of the major consideration I had when I bought my camera, coming from the four thirds camp. Technology will always be improving, but at any given point in time, technology across the board will not be that much different from each other. So while a four thirds sized sensor could be better than a full-frame camera of ten years ago, it will not be better than a full-frame camera today.

All things equal, if one decides to make an even lower pixel sensor today, you will be able to put larger per pixel sensors because you only need to put 12,052,992 physical devices to capture 12MP on the same area, instead of 21,026,304 (for a Canon) or 24,385,536 (for Nikon D3X) for the same physical sensor area. The only way to fit more physical devices onto the same area is either use more advanced technology (more expensive, and it may not yet exist) or same technology (less expensive, more matured and available). And that's why personally I would choose the latest camera with the least pixel count (all other things being equal).
 

pinholecam

Moderator
Staff member
Jul 23, 2007
10,929
84
48
#9
Here is a demonstration of the high ISO capability of a D3 from the recent YOG boxing by a fellow CSer.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=752252
ISO5000.

I must say, I'm indeed impressed.
While the rest of us mortals were struggling at ISO1600, f4.5 and 1/320, the D3 breezed through at 1/1250, ISO5000, f5.6. Settings that give the shutter speed and DOF to truly bring 'justice to the moment'.
Of course it comes at a price ;)
 

An drew

Senior Member
May 27, 2005
3,920
9
38
#10
Can anyone tell me why Nikon chose to keep the megapixel count low even on their d3 flagship model? its weird how canon keep increasing their mp count but nikon chose to limit it.

What are the advantages or differences of both camps? can anyone enlighten me?
Nikon flagship is the D3X and it has 24.5 mp and this is higher than ANY of the Canon DSLRs at this moment.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Nikon/nikon_d3x.asp

The advantages of the 24.5 mp is quite clear, it is one of the very best available.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...Mark-reviews/DxOMark-review-for-the-Nikon-D3X
 

sfoto100

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2009
2,092
0
36
#11
i have an interesting article to share

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=732639

OR

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Our-publications/DxOMark-Insights/More-pixels-offset-noise!

This article suggest that having more pixel is better, and the noise is roughly the same as long as we compare pics at the SAME size and not 100% crop. why? Because comparing at 100% is not fair.

pls take a look .. it is an eye opener for me!
 

allenleonhart

Deregistered
Sep 17, 2008
3,656
0
0
#13
i have an interesting article to share

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=732639

OR

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Our-publications/DxOMark-Insights/More-pixels-offset-noise!

This article suggest that having more pixel is better, and the noise is roughly the same as long as we compare pics at the SAME size and not 100% crop. why? Because comparing at 100% is not fair.

pls take a look .. it is an eye opener for me!
sounds logical to me. at least to me, any photo small looks good.:thumbsup:
 

Apr 18, 2009
796
0
0
Singapore
#14
To me, i feel that more mega pixel helps in lowering noise in a way. 550D's 18mp vs K-x 12mp.
try downsizing 550d's 18mp to 12mp. it will appear that it has lower noise than k-x 12mp. just another way of thinking. dont bash me
 

Top Bottom