sudden0utburst
In Runtime
- Messages
- 137
- Location
- panama
Does more megapixels in a camera mean better? I know it doesn't always, can someone explain this to me.. i googled it and it doesn't make sense to me.
Does more MP mean better?
- Thread starter sudden0utburst
- Start date
- Status
Megapixles is just a measure of how many pixels are in the image, with 1MP being 1 million pixels. Basically it defines how large an image you can have. Since a "pixel" doesn't have a defined size, we use PPI or Pixels Per Inch to give it a definite size. The higher the number of PPI, the more detailed your picture will be.
So yes technically more MP = better, but it's not the only factor. The sensor size in the camera plays a massive part too. If you have a small sensor, you're cramming lots of pixels into a tiny area. View the image at 100% and you'll get a very noisy picture.
edit: explained pretty well here
So yes technically more MP = better, but it's not the only factor. The sensor size in the camera plays a massive part too. If you have a small sensor, you're cramming lots of pixels into a tiny area. View the image at 100% and you'll get a very noisy picture.
edit: explained pretty well here
Crysalis
Systems Engineer
- Messages
- 1,675
- Location
- United States
It's all about the glass baby!
sudden0utburst
In Runtime
- Messages
- 137
- Location
- panama
thanks!
scroudt
In Runtime
- Messages
- 174
- Location
- Houston, BC, Canada
Good glass is a huge factor, but I think lots of it also has to do with the sensor itself. You're going to get a better quality picture with a full frame sensor then you will with a C sized sensor using the same lens. It would also make a difference if you have a new sensor as to compared to a sensor build 5 years ago.
snowsurfer
El Mágico
- Messages
- 391
- Location
- Spain
Full frame sensors - those equivalent to the size of a 35mm negative/slide film - are only present in a handful of professional SLRs so these are probably out of the question, but just remember that a full size sensor will also highlight cheap lens weak points (pincushion / barrel distortion, chromatic aberration, etc.) This is just one of the reasons why you will never see pros using, say, an EOS D1 with cheap lenses (that's what Canon's "L" line of lenses is for).
In a consumer level product it is all about the glass (lens), as Crysalis posted above. If the camera does not have a RAW mode, the JPEG processing that it applies will also be a big factor. Megapixels are irrelevant as long as you have enough for the maximum size print you want (a good 10.1mp raw made with a high quality camera with a good lens is more than enough for printing a crystal clear and sharp A4+, will you be printing anything bigger?).
Also remember that real optical resolution is always defined by the lens and is expressed in LPI (lines per inch). A great source of excellent lab tests is Digital Photography Review
In a consumer level product it is all about the glass (lens), as Crysalis posted above. If the camera does not have a RAW mode, the JPEG processing that it applies will also be a big factor. Megapixels are irrelevant as long as you have enough for the maximum size print you want (a good 10.1mp raw made with a high quality camera with a good lens is more than enough for printing a crystal clear and sharp A4+, will you be printing anything bigger?).
Also remember that real optical resolution is always defined by the lens and is expressed in LPI (lines per inch). A great source of excellent lab tests is Digital Photography Review
Kharn
Lord Techie,
- Messages
- 7,638
Exactly, using el'cheepo china optic brand lenses and a hand ground Leupold lenses is night and day.
Megapixels is probably one of the less important things if you are only doing A4 prints or smaller.
Hypothetically speaking a 3mp sensor made to the highest standard, paired with the latest image processing chips within the camera, and very expensive lenses, will look far better than some crappy smartphone with their 8mp sensors.
Even my cheap £90 50mm prime lens made my ageing Nikon D80 seem like a totally new camera in terms of picture quality, and it had one of the best sub £800 long zoom range lenses available in the first place. Now I'll never buy anything buy a prime lens again, they're just far better.
Hypothetically speaking a 3mp sensor made to the highest standard, paired with the latest image processing chips within the camera, and very expensive lenses, will look far better than some crappy smartphone with their 8mp sensors.
Even my cheap £90 50mm prime lens made my ageing Nikon D80 seem like a totally new camera in terms of picture quality, and it had one of the best sub £800 long zoom range lenses available in the first place. Now I'll never buy anything buy a prime lens again, they're just far better.
- Status
