Comments on: The Truth About Digital Cameras http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/ Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:03:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: paulbg http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-41930 paulbg Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:50:53 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-41930 Although late to this blog...David Pogues comments are frighteningly accurate. I have just taken a series of images, at the same subject, with flash (for least camera shake) with: finepix 4900Z ( eqiv. 3.3MP) finepix E550 (equiv. 8.5MP) Olympus E-20p (5.1MP) KonicaMinolta D5 (6.1MP) Canon EOS 350D (8.0MP) Result: Without a doubt (and it isn't something I'm glad about!) the finepix 4900Z is the best image; on all fronts, by a fair margin. What can't speak can't lie. As I say I wish it wasn't so! Although late to this blog...David Pogues comments are frighteningly accurate. I have just taken a series of images, at the same subject, with flash (for least camera shake) with: finepix 4900Z ( eqiv. 3.3MP) finepix E550 (equiv. 8.5MP) Olympus E-20p (5.1MP) KonicaMinolta D5 (6.1MP) Canon EOS 350D (8.0MP) Result: Without a doubt (and it isn't something I'm glad about!) the finepix 4900Z is the best image; on all fronts, by a fair margin. What can't speak can't lie.
As I say I wish it wasn't so!

]]> By: Michael http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21512 Michael Wed, 22 Nov 2006 04:27:23 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21512 Yes, I agree about older DSLRs beating newer point and shoots. But when I said "13 megapixel camera" I wasn't thinking of point and shoots. I don't think there currently are any with that resolution--at least I couldn't find any when searching, or when browsing Canon's product line. I think the basic conclusion--that megapixels beyond 5 don't matter that much for most people--is sound (though I think it does help when cropping). In his comments, Pogue says that his point was that the other camera variables matter more than megapixels. Good. It's a shame the article didn't make that clear and that the experimental design was sloppy. Yes, I agree about older DSLRs beating newer point and shoots. But when I said "13 megapixel camera" I wasn't thinking of point and shoots. I don't think there currently are any with that resolution--at least I couldn't find any when searching, or when browsing Canon's product line.

I think the basic conclusion--that megapixels beyond 5 don't matter that much for most people--is sound (though I think it does help when cropping). In his comments, Pogue says that his point was that the other camera variables matter more than megapixels. Good. It's a shame the article didn't make that clear and that the experimental design was sloppy.

]]> By: jacobolus http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21489 jacobolus Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:01:44 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21489 by "lots of recent cameras" I mean the absurd tiny 10+ MP cameras, with lenses nowhere near big enough to resolve that kind of detail. by "lots of recent cameras" I mean the absurd tiny 10+ MP cameras, with lenses nowhere near big enough to resolve that kind of detail.

]]> By: jacobolus http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21488 jacobolus Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:00:39 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21488 Um, there are 4-5 MP DSLRs from a few years ago that beat any 13 MP point and shoot from today by a wide margin. The lenses on lots of recent cameras can't resolve enough detail for their sensors. I think on most point/shoot cameras, 4-5 MP is about the limit of what they need, and there's no reason to perpetuate this idea that more megapixels == better. Um, there are 4-5 MP DSLRs from a few years ago that beat any 13 MP point and shoot from today by a wide margin. The lenses on lots of recent cameras can't resolve enough detail for their sensors. I think on most point/shoot cameras, 4-5 MP is about the limit of what they need, and there's no reason to perpetuate this idea that more megapixels == better.

]]> By: joe mullins http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21471 joe mullins Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:40:32 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21471 There's also a consideration of the printing process used. Many labs don't make the greatest of prints. And all the images were uprezzed pretty heavily. It might have been a different story if they stopped at 11x14. It's really hard to say what the limiting factor is in this equation, but there are plenty of good reasons to want more resolution, cropping being one of them. The methodology used here is deeply flawed, but I think the point is mostly sound. If you're mostly planning on taking pictures of people or snapshots of places you've visited, you're probably not going to notice a huge difference between a 5MP camera and a 10MP camera, especially when you're uprezzing them to larger sizes. There's also a consideration of the printing process used. Many labs don't make the greatest of prints. And all the images were uprezzed pretty heavily. It might have been a different story if they stopped at 11x14. It's really hard to say what the limiting factor is in this equation, but there are plenty of good reasons to want more resolution, cropping being one of them.

The methodology used here is deeply flawed, but I think the point is mostly sound. If you're mostly planning on taking pictures of people or snapshots of places you've visited, you're probably not going to notice a huge difference between a 5MP camera and a 10MP camera, especially when you're uprezzing them to larger sizes.

]]> By: Michael http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21454 Michael Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:20:08 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21454 As a general rule, I think you're right, but I stand by this specific example. How many 13 megapixel cameras do you know of where these other components aren't high quality compared to what you'd find on a 5 megapixel camera? As a general rule, I think you're right, but I stand by this specific example. How many 13 megapixel cameras do you know of where these other components aren't high quality compared to what you'd find on a 5 megapixel camera?

]]> By: LKM http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21453 LKM Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:12:52 +0000 http://mjtsai.com/blog/2006/11/21/the-truth-about-digital-cameras/#comment-21453 >If you set a 13 megapixel camera to shoot at 5 megapixels, >it will produce a better image than a 5 megapixel camera >shooting at its maximum resolution Not necessarily. There are many factors involved here - lens, ccd/cmos size and quality, and so on... If a camera goes for the lower resolution, but instead includes a better lens, you might get better pictures in the end. I think modern digital cameras are so complex that it's almost impossible to make general statements like these. >If you set a 13 megapixel camera to shoot at 5 megapixels,
>it will produce a better image than a 5 megapixel camera
>shooting at its maximum resolution

Not necessarily. There are many factors involved here - lens, ccd/cmos size and quality, and so on... If a camera goes for the lower resolution, but instead includes a better lens, you might get better pictures in the end. I think modern digital cameras are so complex that it's almost impossible to make general statements like these.

]]>