Newest Point and Shoot vs. Older DSLR

[Adal_Maldonado]

When printing large images they say the more mega pixels the better quality results.


Most budget compact cameras under $100 today have between 16 - 20 MP and produce images up to 5152 x 3864 Pixles
View attachment 67766
( Coolpix S3500 )

For printing this estimates to:

17.17 x 12.88 Image @ 300DPI
25.76 x 19.32 @ 200DPI

However older DSLR's for example the entry level Nikon D3000 released in 2009 (ebay $240) have a lower Max Resolution 3,872 × 2,592
and fewer effective megapixels 10.2. yet still have a larger photographic sensor.

View attachment 67767

Compare: Nikon Coolpix cameras have a 1/2.3" Sensor Size that ratio converts to 0.43" in size.
Entry level Nikon DSLR uses a APS-C sensor (less powerful than the $$ full-frame models) (23.6 x 15.8 mm) 1.12" in size

So my question is at what point does the point and shoot with double the Mega Pixles surpass a old DSLR with a larger sensor size?
Which is best for printing larger than 15x20" images?

Thanks!

 

[jaomul]

There is a maths way to explain with dynamic range, iso value etc. In a scene with very little contrast and plenty light the photos may be similar. The minute the conditions are even slightly less than ideal the bigger sensor will perform better. Another thing to think about is the built in lens on a p+s camera is likely of lesser quality than a lens you may put on dslr. There are so many variables

 

[71M]

So my question is at what point does the point and shoot with double the Mega Pixles surpass a old DSLR with a larger sensor size?
Which is best for printing larger than 15x20" images?

Thanks!

I'm don't think that the smaller sensors are physically capable of surpassing an older, larger sensor in terms of resolution and dynamic range.
A bigger 'negative' yields a better image at 15x20". 'APS-C', 23x15 type sensors are a small format. 1/2.3" is tiny. Think Medium Format film for portraits and Large Format film for bigger landscape prints. The compacts high MP count is redundant if it doesn't capture detail or light properly.

 

[KmH]

The pixels in the P&S camera are a lot smaller than the pixels in the D3000.
Not only is the image sensor in the P&S camera smaller (1/2.3" is the smallest), it has more pixels crammed onto it.

Many people only consider how many pixels there are, not how big or small the pixels are.

Image sensor format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

 

[goodguy]

What everybody is trying to say here is that the amount of Mega Pixel on a camera is only one factor.
To say one camera is better then the other there are so many other factors some of them much more important then the amount of mega pixel.
Like Dynamic Range, Low light (High ISO) Performance, or how fast the lens is, anybody who buys a new P&S with lots of MP and think it will out perform an "old DSLR" like the D3000 is going to find himself quite surprised when the D3000 will actually out perform his extremly basic P&S.

 

[JerryLove]

Let's start with determining how many pixels you need in output. That's a function of closeness to the output vs the size of the output. I'm not sure what the numbers are, but I suspect they are on Google (for a similar issue, look at 1080 vs 720 video resolutions as a function of screen-size and distance).

What I'm saying with all that above is "there's a number of pixels in output beyond which adding more does nothing you can see".

That's not to say there's never a use for having more than that many pixels in an original photo... more pixels help with cropping, they resist aliasing, etc. Sometimes software reducing pixels does a better job that fewer physical pixels would have. But in an ideal world, you'd need the same number of pixels in the sensor, and no more, as you want in the output.

A DSLR is closer to that perfect world than most point-and-clicks would be. I know I would take a better 10MP over a worse 16MP any day (indeed: I purchased my 12MP Canon less than 6 months ago).

In addition to the sensor generally being "better" (larger / more sensitive to light, better color, etc), there are other advantages to a DSLR. Lenses are generally better, for one. The ergonomics are, to me, generally much better as well. The ability to capture in RAW (some point-and-clicks can do this), as well as the dynamic range of the sensor.

Is there a point where the small-sensor camera becomes preferrable? Sure. But it's not like I can rattle off a number. Not all point-and-clicks are created equal, and not all DSLRs are either (even with the same MP). Also, not all circumstances respond to the various compromises the same way (the P&C would match the DSLR in broad daylight far sooner than in lesser lighting), nor are all people working with the same levels of importance on the various variations.

 

[Ysarex88 82]

How about a direct comparison.

test_01.jpg
test_02.jpg

One is from a slightly older DSLR with an APS class sensor and the other is from a slightly newer compact P&S with a postage stamp size sensor. The compact is a bigger megapixel camera, but to make this fair I sized it's photo down to equal the DSLR photo.

Joe

 

[table1349]

Ohhhhhhhhh.........................................................A.......Tree.

You couldn't have made it a bit more of an interesting tree shot, say like this?


Seriously, nice example Joe.

 

[goodguy]

Ohhhhhhhhh.........................................................A.......Tree.

You couldn't have made it a bit more of an interesting tree shot, say like this?


Seriously, nice example Joe.

Holly Molly I never knew I liked trees so much until I saw the "tree" in your picture.
Its a GREAT looking "tree"!!! :mrgreen:

 

[Rick58]

What tree?

 

[Adal_Maldonado]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone's comments have helped rationalize my thinking towards selecting cameras. Purchasing cameras on a budget sometimes conjures up such questions.

DPreview.com's studio shot comparison tool shows enlarged images of popular DSLR, which could be helpful too.

 

[bribrius]

I think the problem with point and shoots comes in with creating a dof and bokeh. They are working on it though. I am actually a fan of point and shoots, and bridge cameras over dslrs.