Page 1 of 1
The truth about digital cameras
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 10:17 am
by dezzy
Interesting for all you photography buffs out there . . .
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/ ... s-posts-2/
Do you really need a gazillion megapixels?
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:53 pm
by simon
No you don't. It's an obsession fuelled by marketing people and ignorant consumers who think more = better.
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:00 pm
by DDtB
simon wrote:No you don't. It's an obsession fuelled by marketing people and ignorant consumers who think more = better.
Yup... he speaks the truth!
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:02 pm
by Gareth
simon wrote:No you don't. It's an obsession fuelled by marketing people and ignorant consumers who think more = better.
What you talkin about Willis!
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:04 pm
by simon
Gareth wrote:What you talkin about Willis!
You!
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:56 pm
by james
And the lenses make a big difference too, its not just the CCD resolution.
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 4:27 pm
by David Bryce
in a hell of allot of compacts the quality is actually getting worse as they try to squeeze even more pixel's into tiny little sensors.
5-6 mega-pixels is more than enough for a compact camera.
and yes, as James said, very few compacts have 'proper' lenses so that combined with the ever increasing pixel count can have a detrimental effect as they struggle to resolve detail.
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 5:22 pm
by DDtB
I'm actually wearing that t-shirt today!..
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 5:41 pm
by Gareth
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:20 pm
by poah
having more pixels means you can print bigger but that does not mean quality. having more mp on these small CCD's means smaller diodes, more aplification and more noise compared to less mp. this can be clearly seen comparing the D2X to the 20D. up to iso 400 there is not much difference in noise but 800 and above on the D2X is poor. I can make A3 prints from gig photos at ISO 1600 and they are still sharp and clear. the the man in the street mp means better but when you consider the majority of people don't print their pictures and only post on the web you don't need many mp at all.
the problem with digital compared to film is dynamic range colour and contrast. while good lenses do help digital (non FF) uses a smaller image circle so the contrast and resolution fall off at the edges of the poor lenses are not affected. At the moment the only way I would go for more MP would be the EOS 1dsmk2 with its FF sensor but that would require the best glass and my pocket even with some new freelance work can't go that deep
Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:02 am
by simon
poah wrote:having more pixels means you can print bigger
Yup and this is exactly why for most people it makes no difference beyond 3MP, as they're fine for a 6x4 print.
