Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
P&S 12MP madness
- Thread starter cube
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I share your concern and madness. I work in a camera shop. One of the first questions I ask is what size print have they done from their film camera. Most say 5x7, maybe the occasional 8x10. Mostly 4x6's. But my customers come in thinking that they need more megapixels to get the best 4x6 print.
Well, even if they were printing huge posters - it's not like the point and shoots are able to resolve to anywhere near 12MP. Plus the noise characteristics of those teeny tiny pixels are horrible at anything but ISO 100.
Correct me if i am wrong, but putting 12 mega-pixels in a P&S camera with such a small sensor would only make it worse, wouldn't it?
But that is what customers think, that more megapixels = better quality. When the truth is that it is the image sensor what makes the picture of better quality.
Maybe later on nanotechnology would change things, but right now buying a 12-mp P&S is kind of useless. If you want to print large images, then your best option is getting a SLR.
But that is what customers think, that more megapixels = better quality. When the truth is that it is the image sensor what makes the picture of better quality.
Maybe later on nanotechnology would change things, but right now buying a 12-mp P&S is kind of useless. If you want to print large images, then your best option is getting a SLR.
It's the same with all technology that is marketed to consumers. Take for example LCD monitors. THey keep pushing "response time" and contrast ratio but they never tell you what is the single most important thing: What kind of LCD pannel is used. Is it TM, IPS or what? THe marketing people just push the numbers that sell
Anything above 6 MP on a sensor that size is kinda crazy. Note that many of them require lower resolutions for high ISO or high FPS usage.
You might get better photos by stepping the resolution down to something more reasonable but that's definitely a guess as to how the camera will treat it.
I wouldn't mind if they had a 'high-end' I.S. Fuji PnS that used the 1.6 crop Fuji S5 Pro sensor, they could claim 12MP just like the S5 does, but really it's only 6MP, but with superior DR, and fine detail all the way up to ISO 3200. Would only require a larger lens, but for a PnS, they could downsize and make a relatively smaller/slow 3x zoom lens that could just barely fit on the full front of a PnS. You'd get true dSLR quality, and wide DR in a PnS...kind of like a Leica rangefinder digital for the masses @under $1k--hell, even Paris would buy one, lol. I think it would sell like hotcakes if marketed properly...if only Fuji had a good marketing division to match it's engineering dept.
Nice. Here I am shooting a 4.2MP 1.3x crop.
Oh yeah, and I can make poster print really easily with genuine fractals, which actually looks very nice on the 1D's files...
Oh yeah, and I can make poster print really easily with genuine fractals, which actually looks very nice on the 1D's files...
You gotta understand, what sells. The typical user only sees one thing and cares about one thing.
For cameras, it's megapixels which means little to nothing usually, obviously sensor size and lens are more important to me.
For audio it's watts, which mean nothing because there are way more variables involves than just watts, plus any gear that it's main focus is the wattage is most likely a piece of junk anyway and highly overrated power wise.. Do I have to get into Sony's lies?
For cars it's horsepower, also way more involved than just a number, ever heard the term power to weight ratio?
There is always that one key number or word that a company or should I say companies can slap on a product, and it will grab peoples attention, usually it's a big number.
For cameras, it's megapixels which means little to nothing usually, obviously sensor size and lens are more important to me.
For audio it's watts, which mean nothing because there are way more variables involves than just watts, plus any gear that it's main focus is the wattage is most likely a piece of junk anyway and highly overrated power wise.. Do I have to get into Sony's lies?
For cars it's horsepower, also way more involved than just a number, ever heard the term power to weight ratio?
There is always that one key number or word that a company or should I say companies can slap on a product, and it will grab peoples attention, usually it's a big number.
At my work we currently have an ancient Canon D30 3.2MP camera with a Canon 17-40L lens. All the sales people hate it because its too big and its "only 3.2MP" so they might replace it with a 8 or 10MP P&S. I'm going to see if I can buy it cheap.
I wouldnt mind the 3.2MP body along with my 18-55mm kit lens as a secondary camera to have in the car. The 17-40L would be great for my 20D.
Anyway that ancient 3.2MP camera would probably still blow the doors of any new 10MP+ P&S camera.... well at least if its got the 17-40 lens to go with it.
I wouldnt mind the 3.2MP body along with my 18-55mm kit lens as a secondary camera to have in the car. The 17-40L would be great for my 20D.
Anyway that ancient 3.2MP camera would probably still blow the doors of any new 10MP+ P&S camera.... well at least if its got the 17-40 lens to go with it.
Yeah, lots of Nikon-shooting sports/PJ types with DX lenses still use it because the D3 has the same pixel density and would therefore offer the same resolution with the DX glass.
IMO, the sweet spot for P&S was around 5-6mp. but ya know marketing, I mean they have to contually come out with new models so how many feature are there to improve? i mean the exact same camera w/more mp is a "new model and sells more units of the same.