mp question

[lugnut]

i'm sure it's been asked before but i couldn't seem to produce an answer through searches so here i go;

does megapixels matter when buying a DSLR camera? i have no plans of blowing pictures up any larger than your standard photo sizes so do i really need a 10mp camera or will a 6mp camera produce the same photos?

i would love to hear any thoughts on the matter

 

[Dwig]

... do i really need a 10mp camera or will a 6mp camera produce the same photos...

For prints up to 8x10", there is no need for more than 6mp provided you will do a decent job of framing the picture properly before shooting and not rely on significant cropping to achieve the image you want.

 

[lugnut]

good point, i would like the ability to crop.

 

[Iron Flatline]

They're all fine, the MP race seems to have finally run its course. The manufacturers figured out that more MPs was starting to affect image quality - more pixels means smaller pixels, which means more "noise". Noise usually means poor picture quality as it creates grainy images.

 

[bigtwinky]

They're all fine, the MP race seems to have finally run its course. The manufacturers figured out that more MPs was starting to affect image quality - more pixels means smaller pixels, which means more "noise". Noise usually means poor picture quality as it creates grainy images.

That is the key right there.... the more pixels you cram on a same sized surface, the more noise you get.

So the other thing to factor in is the size of the sensor. 10mp on a point and shoot vs a crop sensor camera vs a full frame camera will give you different levels of noise.

I think that 10mp is the max you should go on a P&S, and I like to aim around 8mp.

 

[inTempus]

They're all fine, the MP race seems to have finally run its course. The manufacturers figured out that more MPs was starting to affect image quality - more pixels means smaller pixels, which means more "noise". Noise usually means poor picture quality as it creates grainy images.

I don't know if I would say it's run its course. Nikon and Canon now have 20+mp cameras. I speculate that every new major release of a new body by either Nikon or Canon will bring more megapixels.

 

[lugnut]

thanks everyone. i really want to get a DSLR but i'm having a hard time decideing what i need to get started in this hobbie, other than lots of money LOL

 

[benlonghair]

The noise issue shows up on my D60 (which is 10.2mp) even at ISO 200. I haven't printed any pics without doing some noise reduction, so I can't say how much it effects overall quality, but it's noticable when zoomed to 100%.

 

[mrodgers]

The noise issue shows up on my D60 (which is 10.2mp) even at ISO 200. I haven't printed any pics without doing some noise reduction, so I can't say how much it effects overall quality, but it's noticable when zoomed to 100%.

If it's just noticable zoomed at 100%, I wouldn't worry about doing noise reduction. I have a superzoom 7.1mp, can you say noise at every ISO level? ISO 64 is noisy, 100 is noisy, 200 has a lot of noise, 400 is almost unusable, and 800 is completely worthless. But if I send them out to print (8x10), I could see absolutely no noise in the print at all. Nor can I see noise when reducing down to web sized to post on the net. I started out doing some noise reduction, but all it did was loose any detail in the shot. The noise was gone simply by resizing for the web while retaining the detail.

In my opinion, people tend to be just a little too picky on the noise thing. I've seen people complain about noise from ISO 800 or 1600 that I look at and think, "Wow, that is a super clean image." You're not going to see that noise on a print or with a web resize.

Example is the thread on here that the guy took 2 shots of his iPhone and asked why one was noisy. It was noisy, but only slightly more than my superzoom would get at ISO 100 or 200. It looked just fine to me.