Image quality and megapixels, little has improved.

Radiation

Radiation

Radiation

Soldato
Joined
12 Oct 2003
Posts
4,027
Recently went from an old £60 3.2mp camera to a new canon £100 16mp thing, looks like it should be great but the image quality isn't much better than the old one, resolution is a lot bigger of course but what's the point in that, where's the improved image quality exactly?

It doesn't look like things have moved on in all these years, sure it has more features like hd video and image stabilisation but otherwise nothings changed, even the hd video quality is more like sd packaged in a higher resolution. :rolleyes:
 
I tend to agree on compact cameras my old 6mp Olympus is just as good as my 16mb Sony, Just bigger res that all, slightly better exposure but nothing to shout about!
 
More resolution does not always equal better image quality. Hence why camera are now like 12mp+, people think they're way better quality pictures, but at that price point, they're not :)
 
Aside from the fact that megapixel count isn't a quantitive measure of image quality, I think most sub £100 cameras are much of a muchness (although the same can be said of entry-level DSLRs). I think technology has moved on...but now, you've got to pay more for it I'm afraid. I think more R&D is being done to improve cameras within mobiles. I wouldn't be surprised if the lower-end of the P&S market disappeared within the next few years.
 
More megapixels give you the potential to capture more detail, but only if the optics are up to it. :) I doubt there's much difference in the sensors and lenses between those two cameras.

Thankfully the megapixel race seems to have plateau'd as of late at around the 16-20mp count, and everyone can now start focussing on stuff that matters. The average consumer just needs educating. :p
 
One of my pet hates this. The general public don't understand that there's so much more to a good camera, other than just a high pixel count.

I would choose my old 3.2MP Nikon over these 16MP+ camera phones any time, although of course, my DSLR would be preferable :p
 
High mega pixels in compacts are a complete farce, as well as the 100x optical zoom rubbish. Both of these these things act to make image quality yucky...
 
It's a bit wrong tbh, you would expect it to be better after 5 years plus going to a better brand camera, the features and build quality are good but what matters most is image quality and im just not seeing much improvement, in fact it would be better if they kept its current quality and saved a lower resolution, blowing it up full size just shows how poor it is with fine detail.
 
R.C.Anderson said:
One of my pet hates this. The general public don't understand that there's so much more to a good camera, other than just a high pixel count.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can just blame the uninformed for not knowing, it's something that manufacturers and salesman have used to sell cameras now for years.

There was a time when every new camera was plastered in stickers saying how many megapixels it had.

I think we have finally reached the stage now though where compacts are falling out of favour for camera phones and megapixels have reached the level where there is little need to go higher unless your shooting for billboards or something.
 
If you print big you might notice a difference but with a small print or viewed on screen there won't be much. Even a high def screen is only about 2mp!
 
Doesn't matter what size you look at, the sensor on a compact just isn't big enough or good enough to process 16MP images.

These cameras would benefit simply by reducing the MP count to a maximum of 10 or even less. No one buying these cameras will want to print out billboard sized images from them.
 
Nexus said:
I don't think you can just blame the uninformed for not knowing, it's something that manufacturers and salesman have used to sell cameras now for years.
Click to expand...

Yea, I guess it's not so much that people don't know, but more that companies take advantage of it, and sell a load of rubbish!
 
Radiation said:
It's a bit wrong tbh, you would expect it to be better after 5 years plus going to a better brand camera, the features and build quality are good but what matters most is image quality and im just not seeing much improvement, in fact it would be better if they kept its current quality and saved a lower resolution, blowing it up full size just shows how poor it is with fine detail.
Click to expand...

The improvements over those 5 years were cancelled out by the increase in MP count.

The marketing depts of most camera makers for that period of time were in a MP war with each other and their number one goal was to get more MP crammed in the camera so they can tell the general public why it was better than the other makes.

Thankfully, the MP race looks like it is coming to an end and we might see newer models concentrating on quality again rather than this arbitrary figure.
 
I think going forward more and more people who would have traditionally bought compact cameras based on megapixels are not going to bother buying them at all - they will just use their mobile phones.

Those folks looking to buy a dedicated camera will (or should be) slightly more discerning about the specs of their chosen camera and will be more interested in zoom range, sensor size and ISO performance etc. and the marketing will move away from megapixels.
 
While I agree with the above it is amazing these days to see the poor quality shots taken on mobiles and posted online, out of focus, blurry, poor colour etc etc most of which is to do with them being taken on mobile phones in poor conditions.

My wife has a decent P&S and it is still a lot better than comapred to all her friends crappy pictures on their mobiles.

While mobile phone cameras are getting a lot better there is still a very large group of phone users taken poor pictures on older mobile phones that are rubbish compared to a £100-£200 P&S.

I still get out my parents pictures taken on cameras in the 70's and 80's and think they look a hell of a lot better than the rubbish I see from my friends mobiles, hopefully it will get better but it is also noticable the amount of families that have a DSLR in auto mode to get decent kids/family shots they can't get on mobiles.
 
We still sell loads of P&S cameras, mostly to young women who don't know much about technical aspects of cameras. I always see people poring over the price tickets working out which has the best zoom/MP count per pound. I try to re-educate them, but no one trusts a salesman these days so when I try to tell them that a high MP count can often mean poor low light performance and that the lens is the most important part, they think I'm trying to scam them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom