Camera megapixel ratings - are we being fooled

[Gilligan]

The megapixel race is ongoing. Are we being fooled by "point and shoot camera" manufacturers as respects their Megapixel ratings?

I have an Olympus C4000Z camera. It is a 4MP camera that outputs a JPEG image at 3200 X 2400 pixels.

I considered upgrading to the Fuji E900 which is a 9 MP camera so as to get much better results when cropping photos. The E900 outputs a JPEG at 3488 X 2616. That is not even a 10% increase in pixels versus my Oly C4000Z.

I came to the conclusion it was not a worthwhile upgrade for the purpose of getting better results when cropping photos.

As I read the Steves Digicam review for the E900 it appears that you cannot use the optical zoom feature in the Macro mode as the review states: "the optical zoom is locked at wide angle".

The E900 may take better photos than my Oly C4000Z, if for no other reason it is more recent technology. However, there is much more than a "Megapixel" rating that is relative to the quality of the picture.
I think the number of pixels in the JPEG tells a large part of the story. The sensor, processor and all the rest of the components play their parts in contributing to the quality of the photo and they all vary from camera to camera and manufacturer to manufacturer.

 

[DiverBuoy]

megapixel's are we being fooled? In a word, yes.

 

[alcina]

Ditto - yes. More MP is not the be all end all and in some cases cameras in a manufacturer's line up with more MP are actually worse than the older, less MP models.

Do your homework carefully and don't be fooled by advertising or nice salespeople who tell you that you have to buy the latest!

 

[markfm]

Where did you hear of that image size for the C4000? Max is 2288 x 1712, in other words 4 megapixels (3917K, actually).

 

[Scuba_Jenny]

I think the number of pixels in the JPEG tells a large part of the story.

Ok, jumping in here with limited knowledge of the digital cameras and how they work. Since I am looking for a camera (the 3 and 4 megapixels are really cheap right now!)
I think you have it there. From what I understand the default DPI is 72. 72 DPI is web graphic quality images. Simple print images are about 300 DPI, and good print quality starts at 600 DPI. Simply put the more pixels in a given area, the sharper and better the image.
JPEG images use a lossy compression. If you start with a large size image say 3488 X 2616 and squish it to fit say, 1800 x 1200, you still have 72 DPI.
So, while megapixels are nice, the higher resolutions are whats most important. Correct?

 

[ScubaLuke]

I have an Olympus C4000Z camera. It is a 4MP camera that outputs a JPEG image at 3200 X 2400 pixels.

That's an interpolated size. Software in the camera takes the 4MP image captured by the sensor and interpolates a 7.7MP image. It's really not a useful feature to have on a camera since most image editing software has that feature and it doesn't add any real detail.

However, your point is still well taken. Megapixelage isn't everything. The sensor type, the electronics that capture the image, the camera lens, and the camera software all have an impact on the final image quality. Not to mention the photographer.

DP Review does a good job of evaluating image quality. I also like their camera comparison option that lets you compare different camera's features.
Luke
P.S. This doesn't mean that I still don't want a D2X.

 

[Rinkopr]

I am waiting for one of the companies to bring out a digital in a reasonable price range that maintains the proper aspect ratio. I don't remember the terms, as I only dabble in the camera arena, but when I bought my wife the 10D from Canon, the only ones that kept the correct size were Canon 1DNS, Kodak and Nikon (if i remember correctly). They had the CMOS chip the same size as a 35mm negative, but they cost almost $5k or more for the body. I just hate having to decide what part of the picture I am going to crop to get a true 8 x 10 or 11 x 17.
I guess I just frame the picture I am taking to tight to allow for adjustment....

 

[HowardE]

Megapixel, while it isn't everything, IS the image size in pixels. L times W.

What are benefits of more megapixels?
1) Larger image size - gives you the ability to print enlarged photos without seeing the dots. With a 7mp camera, you could print 11X17, and it will look GOOD. If you print an 11X17 photo from a 4mp camera, you will see grainyness (dots)
2) The ability to crop a small item from a larger image and still have a large image.
This sounds weird, but let's take for example the photo of this arrow crab. The original size of this 7mp photo was 3072 X 2304 (7mp) - I cropped the original, and I still have a 1200X1100 Photo of the crab left. I can then reduce the size of this for the web even more if I want to, to get the "macro" look. (please note that I've reduced the sizes of the photos to be able to post them)

If these benefits don't seem useful to you, then buy a less expensive 3 or 4 mp camera.

 

[LavaSurfer]

The megapixel race is ongoing. Are we being fooled by "point and shoot camera" manufacturers as respects their Megapixel ratings?

I have an Olympus C4000Z camera. It is a 4MP camera that outputs a JPEG image at 3200 X 2400 pixels.

Markfm is right on.
The 3200 X 2400 would be an 8MP camera.
The CCD in the C4000Z camera is a 2288x1712. I got that number of OLY's web site.

There may be some magic taking place in the JPG software making the image bigger but the original image is a typical 4MP image and you cant stretch a picture and add quality.

The size of the CCD in MP determines the pixel number.
The dimensions of the CCD determine the clarity in low light.
A large CCD with high pixel ratings will give a clear large picture in low light.

Anything above 4MP is almost a waste for most peoples needs.
Printing smaller than or equal to 8x10's

That’s where the rip off comes in to play.
The camera companies are selling everyone that they need more MP when in fact they don't.

 

[Charlie99]

Ok, jumping in here with limited knowledge of the digital cameras and how they work. Since I am looking for a camera (the 3 and 4 megapixels are really cheap right now!)
I think you have it there. From what I understand the default DPI is 72. 72 DPI is web graphic quality images. Simple print images are about 300 DPI, and good print quality starts at 600 DPI. Simply put the more pixels in a given area, the sharper and better the image.
JPEG images use a lossy compression. If you start with a large size image say 3488 X 2616 and squish it to fit say, 1800 x 1200, you still have 72 DPI.
So, while megapixels are nice, the higher resolutions are whats most important. Correct?

DPI doesn't make much sense when talking about cameras. If you have an image 720 pixels by 720 pixels and print it out or display it on a screen so that it is 10" square, than you have 720/10 = 72DPI. Take that same 720x720 pixel image and print it or display it as a 2.5" square, and you have 720/2.5"= 288 DPI.

In other words, the same data set or image can be 72 DPI low quality or 288 DPI higher quality, by just changing the output size.

For cameras it makes more sense to talk about total pixels in the image rather than DPI.

-----------------------------------

In real life I rarely achieve the 4MP resolution of my Olympus Stylus 400 point and shoot due to mundane problems like out-of-focus, blur from camera shake, motion blur, depth of field, etc.