The Importance Of Megapixels?

Irrespective of the math and rhetoric, I can see the difference between a 5 mp, a 8mp, 14mp and 21 mp camera in terms of sharpness on the screen.

skieur
I can too. Images from my aunt's 6mp D40 is far sharper and better quality than my 7mp or my friend's 10mp superzooms on screen and in print.
 
I can too. Images from my aunt's 6mp D40 is far sharper and better quality than my 7mp or my friend's 10mp superzooms on screen and in print.

This demonstrates something important: higher megapixel cameras tend to reveal more flaws in lenses. High megapixel cameras are very unforgiving in this way -- they show more detail, which reveals quite a lot of problems.
 
This demonstrates something important: higher megapixel cameras tend to reveal more flaws in lenses. High megapixel cameras are very unforgiving in this way -- they show more detail, which reveals quite a lot of problems.

Very true. A D40 may outperform a superzoom with a smaller sensor and a so/so lens but put a Zeiss lens on a 14 mp DSLR and it will wipe out the d40 in sharpness quality.

skieur
 
Available MP can also depend somewhat on what your endpoint is. My client prefers more dots because they sometimes crop fairly aggressively to call out small details that are interesting and zoom in on them in their brochures. If you're just running a 6MP camera, this can be somewhat challenging.

Generally, however, "more" isn't necessarily important.

That being said, more won't kill you either... as long as it's not so much more that the manufacturer is cramming pixels into a tiny sensor, which can actually REDUCE quality.

Go for more if you can, but don't cry if someone has a bigger... um... sensor... than you do. :)

Sensor envy.

:lol:
 
Smaller size files are only masking "flaws" because of the reduced resolution. Two images taken from different cameras displayed at the same resolution - you will be able to tell the difference if you know how.
 
Not to Hijack this thread, but has anyone printed a poster size (20x30) from a D90 size file? Just wondering how the quality looked.

Thanks

When I had my D70s (half the megapixels as my D90) I printed a 16x24 picture which is still hanging in my son's bedroom. I can honestly say that the quality of the picture is every bit as good as any 8x10 I've printed and looks even better than on my screen. I can even stick my nose on the picture and not see any pixels.

That's a 16x24 on a 6.1mp sensor (outdated sensor too by today's standards)

So, with my D90 at 12.x mp I would not hesitate to print a 20x30. To be honest, I wouldn't hesitate to go even a bit larger than 20x30 with confidence.

The problem comes with cropping. At 16x24 on my D70s I wouldn't have felt comfortable cropping very much and printing that large (the one I printed had zero cropping). With a D90, I could still feel comfortable cropping the image down a good bit and still printing the 16x24.

Megapixels for me are good for 2 things.....printing larger with less loss in quality, and being able to crop an image some while still being able to print fairly large.
 
When I had my D70s (half the megapixels as my D90) I printed a 16x24 picture which is still hanging in my son's bedroom. I can honestly say that the quality of the picture is every bit as good as any 8x10 I've printed and looks even better than on my screen. I can even stick my nose on the picture and not see any pixels.

That's a 16x24 on a 6.1mp sensor (outdated sensor too by today's standards)

So, with my D90 at 12.x mp I would not hesitate to print a 20x30. To be honest, I wouldn't hesitate to go even a bit larger than 20x30 with confidence.

The problem comes with cropping. At 16x24 on my D70s I wouldn't have felt comfortable cropping very much and printing that large (the one I printed had zero cropping). With a D90, I could still feel comfortable cropping the image down a good bit and still printing the 16x24.

Megapixels for me are good for 2 things.....printing larger with less loss in quality, and being able to crop an image some while still being able to print fairly large.

Thank you. That is what I was hoping to hear. I got what I tihnk is a cool HDR sunset picture that I'm hoping to frame.
 
Generally, however, "more" isn't necessarily important.

That being said, more won't kill you either... as long as it's not so much more that the manufacturer is cramming pixels into a tiny sensor, which can actually REDUCE quality.


:lol:


Yep, the images from my 8mp Kodak point-n-shoot are definitely inferior to those from my 6mp D40.
 
Thanks to all the replies, i understand it allot better now. As an amateur, I'm not planning on printing large prints, or to sell any of my photos. So knowing what i now know, i feel more comfortable with getting a camera with less megapixels and not feeling inferior to those with huge 21MP cameras.

Regards,
Jamie.
 
I personally feel that MP do make a definite difference in large scale poster work and zoom work as well. I have been confined to 13x10 surface area when printing my images due to my 6MP restriction. Where I have seen my brother in law print out 35x28 with his 40D 10MP. Also helps when cropping a image.
 
How important are megapixels?

Definitely not "25 posts" important.

I think the first reply sufficed.
 
How important are megapixels?

Definitely not "25 posts" important.

I think the first reply sufficed.

How about 25 posts at least once a week? :)

Trust me this comes up and is debated a lot. Often far less pleasantly. :)
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top