Megapixels.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by MacOCD, Jun 10, 2009.

  1. MacOCD macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    #1
    Alright, So i know a lot about computers, but not a lot about DSLR Cameras... I noticed the more megapixel the higher the price (of course) but why are megapixels so use full... If I can get a brief explanation of the deal that would be great! Thanks.
     
  2. jmann macrumors 604

    jmann

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Location:
    bump on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea
    #2
    Megapixels only have to do with how big the image actually is, and how big it can be blown up without looking pixelated. What you need is a nice lens to take good photos. :)
     
  3. MacOCD thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    #3
    So Basically, Less megapixels i can't get a huge image... I know the Nikon D40 has 6.1 Megapixels i think... Do you know how big that can be scaled up?
     
  4. jmann macrumors 604

    jmann

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Location:
    bump on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea
    #4
    I did some quick research. Check here that person has a 6.1 MP camera too.
     
  5. miket019 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #5
    With a 6mp camera, the largest quality print you would be able to get would be around 16" by 20", after that you might lose some quality.
     
  6. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #6
    More megapixels = better quality.

    Don't pay any attention to those saying "it's all about the sensor" or "it's all about the lens" or "it's all about the photographer's eye for a scene," it's 100% about megapixels.

    If you have a camera with more megapixels then it takes better pictures.
    This will get complaints...


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel
     
  7. MacOCD thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    #7
    Well, I'm just doing research to buy a DSLR, on a budget and i do want a good camera... I was just concerned with the megapixels. 16 by 20 isn't that bad, its not like I'm gonna go try and sell these :p Hobby's are just for fun.
     
  8. jmann macrumors 604

    jmann

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Location:
    bump on a log in a hole in the bottom of the sea
    #8
    16x20 is pretty huge. It should be fine. My Sony is a 10mp. but I bet your DSLR takes nice photos because of the type of camera it is. Mine is a fancy point and shoot. :)
     
  9. thomahawk macrumors 6502a

    thomahawk

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Location:
    Osaka, Japan
    #9
    I love the Nikon D40, i dont think megapixels matters a lot. only for if your printing huge prints or your blowing up a huge poster.

    i have used the nikon d40 its a great camera just get a nice big aperture lenses and your good go :)

    i currently use a Canon Rebel XSi, love it. 12mp to me is just right. i take better pictures than a friend who sports a 50D (15mp i beleive) but i guess its cause hes using the kit lenses and i was using a rented 24-105L :eek:
     
  10. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #10
    Just to clear things up...

    EDIT: lol there's the white text. It will get complaints because it's kinda wrong. 10 megapixels in a samsung phone camera vs 6 megapixels in a slightly old SLR...the SLR wins, no discussion.

    1 pixel = 1 bit of information from a scene. More pixels = more information. But smaller sensor, mediocre lens means information is not captured efficiently. Hence, megapixels != quality.
     
  11. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #11
    Not "kinda" wrong. Totally 100% wrong.
     
  12. TheReef macrumors 68000

    TheReef

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    #12
    Theoretically, the more megapixels you have (for a given sensor size) the more noisy your images will be… ;)
     
  13. Phrasikleia macrumors 601

    Phrasikleia

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Location:
    Over there------->
    #13
    What is important is not merely the number of megapixels but the size of them. A small sensor with lots of megapixels means very small photosites that have weak light-collecting capabilities. In other words, this means a weak signal and therefore more noise in the image.

    Conversely, a large sensor with the same number of megapixels will have larger photosites and will therefore have a better signal-to-noise ratio.

    For example (clickable):

    [​IMG]

    These two images have roughly the same number of megapixels represented, but the upper image is from a camera with a very small sensor. The lower image was taken with a DSLR that has an APS-C sensor, so one that is many times larger. The upper one appears to have fewer megapixels only because the larger amount of noise robs the image of detail. These shots were taken in relatively low light (inside a museum), where the light-collecting abilities of a sensor make a big difference.
     
  14. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #14
    So what you said was tongue-in-cheek?

    Well you got me there Chundles :D
     
  15. jake.f macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    #15
    Please don't pay any attention to this post. Please.
     
  16. TheReef macrumors 68000

    TheReef

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    #16
    Still haven't seen the white text? ;)
     
  17. jake.f macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    #17
    Yeh i saw it but i still didn't want TS thinking it was true.
     
  18. toxic macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    #18
    not completely true. while 150 DPI is pretty good when looking at a large print relatively closely, you don't need that kind of resolution for a huge print because, well, who looks at a 16x20 from 6" away?

    to take an extreme example, if you covered the moon with a print with a resolution of 1 dot per mile, it'd look pretty good from here.

    also not completely true. the advantage of an SLR/RF is the size of the sensor, not necessarily the size of the pixel: Small pixel sensors do not have worse performance
     
  19. windowpain macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #19
    I put photos from my D40 on my 37'' high def tv and it was a razor sharp image (using the new 1.8f 35mm) even viewed from a foot away.
    That resolution is higher than most printers (I think) so I know the can go at least 80x45cm, probably get acceptable quality at much bigger sizes too.

    I'm never going to print even remotely near that size, so for me 6.1 megapixels is enough.
    Hope that helps. :apple:
     
  20. telecomm macrumors 65816

    telecomm

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Location:
    Rome
    #20
    Any decent camera will produce images that look sharp on an HDTV (assuming things are in focus, etc.), since the resolution of an HD screen is low relative to the size of any digital photo produced by a modern digital camera.

    One thing that more megapixels does get you (assuming it's a decently sized sensor, etc.) is the ability to get better crops. You may want to crop your images more often than you want to blow them up to poster size.
     
  21. Nordichund macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    #21
    One of the reasons why I bought the Nikon D90 was due to it having 12 Megapixels.
    Taking a photo using a 6 Megaixel camera is fine as long as you are using the correct lense. However where I find having more Megapixels really is an advantage is cropping. Blowing up those small images in your photo.

    Earlier this week I was lucky enough to go on a whale safari and unfortunately the lense I was using could not get close enough to take great pictures of the sperm whales I was watching. Once I was back at home I was able to crop the images and get some close ups I am very happy with, images I would NEVER have been able to get had I used say a 6 megapixel camera.
    If you want to play around with the smaller images on a photo and say a programme like Photoshop, then the more megapixels the better IMO.
     
  22. NathanCH macrumors 65816

    NathanCH

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    #22
    I only have 6 mega pixels right now, but I only look my photos on my computer, so I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 6 and 12.
     
  23. AlexH macrumors 68000

    AlexH

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    #23
    I like a few extra megapixels when I get crop-happy. :)
     
  24. Padaung macrumors 6502

    Padaung

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    I think somebody forgot to tell Canon that when they created the 5D MkII
     
  25. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #25
    Except that even for the Mark II, it can't fully match the D700's light-gathering ability. At just 12 MPs, the D700 combines still-strong resolution with relatively huge pixels, enabling ISO 3200 to look like ISO 400 did just a few years ago, and perhaps more recently than that. Its ISO 3200 looks like your average compact camera today at its best.
     

Share This Page