The megapixel con • Non-Gaming • Photography • Eurogamer.net

Deleted user 20 January 2010 14:47:14

We all kind of knew this anyway, but someone's gone out to prove at what point megapixels no longer matter.

This is for compact cameras - the problem is obviously worse in cameraphones.

Deleted user 20 January 2010 14:49:20

TT posted something along these lines once somewhere. The big names are responding as well, the Canon G11 has less megapixels than the G10, which is a pretty major thing really.

I wish the mobile phone industry would take note though. Smallest sensors known to man, and yet you can now get 12MP camera phones. Ridiculous.

Deleted user 20 January 2010 14:52:21

but... but... they're MEGA!

Deleted user 20 January 2010 15:05:37

12MP camera phones? Really?

What's the iPhone 3GS camera like?

HoriZon 20 Jan 2010 15:06:52 14,352 posts
Seen 60 minutes ago
Registered 19 years ago

cianchristopher wrote:
12MP camera phones? Really?

What's the iPhone 3GS camera like?

3MP and tbh not that great its not about MP its about a good lens and flash tbh. Which the iPhone has neither of.

PhoenixFlames 20 Jan 2010 15:14:59 9,263 posts
Seen 6 years ago
Registered 14 years ago

How weird, I was just telling this to my colleagues at work. They were amazed.

The conversation started because one of my colleagues said, "I need a new camera because mine is really old, it is only 7MP."

Deleted user 20 January 2010 15:19:13

Samsung pixon12 phone is 12MP. Think Nokia are doing one also.

I believe 7MP is the sweet spot for small sensors.

Deleted user 20 January 2010 15:25:12

I usually point out that my SLR is only 6MP but somehow takes a much nicer picture than camera phones of the same or higher MP when talking about this.

phAge 20 Jan 2010 15:28:04 25,487 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 18 years ago

kalel wrote:
Samsung pixon12 phone is 12MP. Think Nokia are doing one also.

I believe 7MP is the sweet spot for small sensors.

/pats 6.3MP Finepix F31

terminalterror 20 Jan 2010 15:56:03 18,932 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 20 years ago

kalel wrote:
Samsung pixon12 phone is 12MP. Think Nokia are doing one also.

I believe 7MP is the sweet spot for small sensors.

I'm pretty sure that sweet spot (I'd heard 6MP, which isn't massively different) is for compact camera sensors, which are enormous compared to ones on a phone.

otto Moderator 20 Jan 2010 15:58:48 49,322 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

I don't even know off the top of my head how many megapixels my current camera has, more than I need that's for sure.

Sephi 20 Jan 2010 16:17:47 142 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

/Pats 10.1MP Canon 40D ;-)

Popzeus 20 Jan 2010 16:18:49 8,425 posts
Seen 5 years ago
Registered 16 years ago

That point-one of a megapixel makes all the difference.

dr_faulk 20 Jan 2010 16:38:29 93 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 16 years ago

I've gone back to an old Zenit film camera. Interchangeable lens and film combinations outweight the obvious setbacks, and that with a digital camera you're "stuck" with the same image processing quality.

Jeepers 20 Jan 2010 16:40:21 16,616 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 16 years ago

dr_faulk wrote:
I've gone back to an old Zenit film camera. Interchangeable lens and film combinations outweight the obvious setbacks, and that with a digital camera you're "stuck" with the same image processing quality.

Even worse than that are the spud-like companies that are putting sensors into lenses. Stupid-arsed idea, that one.

otto Moderator 20 Jan 2010 16:42:00 49,322 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

Hmm. I could never go back to film. Digital has overtaken 35mm film in terms of quality, and of course it's much more flexible. It's very easy to emulate different film types in digital post processing. Not sure what you mean by being stuck with the same image processing quality. A raw digital image file gives you, well, the raw data, just like a film negative; and how you manipulate that to get your end print is up to you.

dr_faulk 20 Jan 2010 16:42:34 93 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 16 years ago

Is that where the image stabilisation takes place? My Dad got that new Panasonic Lumix, the smallest 4-mirror SLR thing, and I saw a switch on the lens for it. Seemed weird.

Jeepers wrote:

dr_faulk wrote:
I've gone back to an old Zenit film camera. Interchangeable lens and film combinations outweight the obvious setbacks, and that with a digital camera you're "stuck" with the same image processing quality.

Even worse than that are the spud-like companies that are putting sensors into lenses. Stupid-arsed idea, that one.

Deleted user 20 January 2010 16:42:41

terminalterror wrote:

kalel wrote:
Samsung pixon12 phone is 12MP. Think Nokia are doing one also.

I believe 7MP is the sweet spot for small sensors.

I'm pretty sure that sweet spot (I'd heard 6MP, which isn't massively different) is for compact camera sensors, which are enormous compared to ones on a phone.

Phone cameras and the whole "as good as a "real" camera" thing are really annoying me at the moment as I look for a new handset. I saw a review yesterday that claimed a particular phone would match and exceed the abilities of an SLR because of the stupidly high megapixel count it had. The misinformation going round at the moment is incredible

dr_faulk 20 Jan 2010 16:44:29 93 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 16 years ago

Yes, but you don't get to swan around with a camera stamped with "Made in USSR" and get to say things like, "In Soviet Russia, camera photos you!"

But, with RAW images, the quality is still dependent on the make / quality of the CCD, right? My thinking is that you can always buy different / different film as it's manufactured (not that anyone's breaking new ground with film manufacturing).

otto wrote:
Hmm. I could never go back to film. Digital has overtaken 35mm film in terms of quality, and of course it's much more flexible. It's very easy to emulate different film types in digital post processing. Not sure what you mean by being stuck with the same image processing quality. A raw digital image file gives you, well, the raw data, just like a film negative; and how you manipulate that to get your end print is up to you.

terminalterror 20 Jan 2010 16:48:21 18,932 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 20 years ago

dr_faulk wrote:
Yes, but you don't get to swan around with a camera stamped with "Made in USSR" and get to say things like, "In Soviet Russia, camera photos you!"

But in capitalist west, you don't photo your camera?

rudedudejude 20 Jan 2010 16:55:14 2,374 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 16 years ago

What would be the standard MP camera the average consumer might need? 6MP? i.e when do MP approach the thingy of diminishing returns?

otto Moderator 20 Jan 2010 16:56:24 49,322 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

Judge-Fang wrote:
The misinformation going round at the moment is incredible

LOL

otto Moderator 20 Jan 2010 16:57:32 49,322 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago

Adam_T wrote:
What would be the standard MP camera the average consumer might need? 6MP? i.e when do MP approach the thingy of diminishing returns?

Yeah, 6 or 7 is all you'd realistically need unless you're into making poster-sized prints.

Deleted user 20 January 2010 16:57:32

Adam_T wrote:
What would be the standard MP camera the average consumer might need? 6MP? i.e when do MP approach the thingy of diminishing returns?

On a compact, yeah, around 6MP.

Nth 20 Jan 2010 17:02:27 3,164 posts
Seen 23 hours ago
Registered 12 years ago

otto wrote:

Judge-Fang wrote:
The misinformation going round at the moment is incredible
LOL

It's got more RED too. Leica only has a silly little dot.

terminalterror 20 Jan 2010 17:20:07 18,932 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 20 years ago

otto wrote:

Adam_T wrote:
What would be the standard MP camera the average consumer might need? 6MP? i.e when do MP approach the thingy of diminishing returns?
Yeah, 6 or 7 is all you'd realistically need unless you're into making poster-sized prints.

Poster size prints you intend to stand right next to and stare at in detail.

If you just want one big on the wall, and you'll be looking at it from a few metres away, then 6MP will be perfectly fine.

Deleted user 20 January 2010 17:24:20

I dunno, I do find a high MP count is useful for cropping purposes. It's nice to be able to zoom right in sometimes.

terminalterror 20 Jan 2010 18:04:06 18,932 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 20 years ago

kalel wrote:
I dunno, I do find a high MP count is useful for cropping purposes. It's nice to be able to zoom right in sometimes.

It is certainly handy, but only on a DSLR where having the extra megapixels doesn't adversely affect image quality (like in a compact).

Megapixels are used as marketing with DSLRs, but nowhere near the same extent as compacts, which themselves don't do it nearly as much as cameraphones do.

I struggle to think of a single cameraphone that wasn't marketed purely on the basis of its megapixel count (the only feature that comes to mind is having a flash). At least compacts have smile shutters, face detection, panorama stitching and various other marketing gimmicks alongside "MOAR MEGAPIXELS!!!11".