Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

    I note from the thread on the Canon 1D MK3 that two members who have bought this camera are over the moon although it is 10mp and I believe it is a 1/3 sensor. My question therefore is why do manufacturers go in for higher pixels like in the 5D MK3 and 6D.I note that there is something about pixels in the current issue of the EOS magazine but this doesn't not answer my question. I would have thought with higher pixels the images will be pin sharp like in the 5Dmk3 & 6D & other full frame cameras?

    My second question is if lower pixels can result in very good images why is that Camera phones do not produce better images than a DSLR?

    Puzzled

    Nathaniel
    Canon 6D; Canon 760D;Canon G15;Canon 40mm f2.8(Pancake);Canon 50mm f1.8(ii); Canon 17mm-40mm f4L;Canon EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM;Canon EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 STM lens;Canon 24mm-105mmf4L IS;Canon 70-300mm f4-f5.6 L IS USM;Kenko 1.4x HD TC;Canon 430EX ii flash;Giottos tripod;Manfretto monopod;Cokin P filters + bits and pieces!

    www.flickr.com/photos/nathaniel3390

    North Wales where music and the sea give a great concert!

    #2
    Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

    I'm eagerly awaiting the tech guru's to come along and answer this, it baffles me.... :-(
    Alan

    Canon EOS 7D MK II, Canon 18-55mm IS STM, Canon 55-250mm STM.

    Aim in life, to learn something new every day.

    Comment


      #3
      Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

      All to do with the size of each pixel

      In theory and probably in practice 10 mp on a full frame sensor( biggest pixels) shoud be better than a 1 series (slightly smaller sensor so smaller pixels) which in turn should be better than a 1.6 crop sensor ( even smaller sensor so even smaller pixels)
      Stan
      Stan - LRPS, CPAGB, BPE2*

      http://neptuno-photography.foliopic.com/
      flickr

      Comment


        #4
        Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

        There are several competing procsses at play. Larger pixels are more efficent at gathering light, and have a higher signal to noise ratio. At pixel level, bigger pixels will thus almost always look better.
        Against that is the resolution issue; the more pixels per unit area, the better the resolution.
        If people are looking just at 100% views, the smaller MP sensor will probably look better. If at a given (large) print size, it's quite possible that the higher MP sensor will look better.

        What's interesting is the result of these two competing issues. Manufacturers have put a huge amount of effort into improving the efficiency and size of pixels whilst cramming more onto the senor, using techniques such as back illumination (wiring the pixels from the rear, so as not to use valuable sensor area) and gapless microlenses, getting as much of the light that falls onto the sensor as possible into the actual pixels. It's not possible to predict exactly what the result will be by knowing basic specs, the only real way of looking at it is by looking at prints. It's possible to get good prints from a D30, with 3.1MP - with the right subject. Canon's 10MP sensors, both APS-C and APS-H have been excellent. At the end of the day, whatever gets you the result you want is the right choice for you.

        Oh, and cameraphones, despite huge quality improvements in the last few years, have such miniscule pixels that they just can't compete with the big boys.
        Please don't ask about my kit, it's embarrassing!

        Comment


          #5
          Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

          In theory and probably in practice 10 mp on a full frame sensor( biggest pixels) shoud be better than a 1 series
          You are right on that one Stan, but 1 Series bodies were available in full frame (1Ds) and 1.3 crop (1D) until recently. Now both have been replaced by the 1Dx, which is full frame.

          The final quality is down to a combination of sensor size (the bigger the better), pixel size (the bigger the better), Pixel gap (that is the gap between each pixel and that is the smaller the better) and finally the processor and processor Algorithms.

          One of the biggest problems is the the sensor has to operate in many different light conditions and a dedicated DSLR copes with this relatively easily and has sophisticated controls to make the best of whatever light is available. It is only when we get into very contrasty light such as pointing it into the sun, or very low levels of light that we start to get into trouble and flood the sensor with too much light (burnt out whites) or no shadow detail (Blocked Shadows). In these conditions there will also be a significant increase in signal to noise ratio, which we refer to as noise. Noise is where the major improvements in quality have taken place with the latest generation of bodies much happier at higher ISO's than earlier ones. I remember my D60 and 10D were unusable at 400 ISO and above, but for wildlife, to get the speeds and aperture I want to use, I rarely shoot below 800 ISO.

          So, if you want the highest possible quality, leaving lenses and post processing out of the equation, you want the latest generation body with a full frame sensor, gapless technology and a Digic 5+ processor. But quite frankly, even the latest entry level Canon body will deliver results better than pro bodies of a decade ago.

          As for Mobile phones, they have tine sensor, limited processor capability and generally plastic lenses. The megapixel count of 40 million or so used to be interpolated. That means they may have had 5MP, but because of the way they were processed, it gave the impression of a much larger pixel count. I am not sure if that is the current case with phones, as I haven't looked into it recently. If ever a colleague shows me a picture of superb quality from a camera phone that stands up to enlargement, I will look into it again.

          Hope that helps.
          Colin

          Comment


            #6
            Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

            very technically put replies and very interesting as well ,over the last several years i must have gone through around 20 different camera bodies (various makes ) and no end of lenses on a learning curve looking for that elusive thing "quality" not something that you can really describe because till the files are on your computer or mac you can't define what you can't describe .i have always up till now used normal 1.6 sensor cameras mainly due to price and the believe that for wildlife it was what was needed .
            middle of last year after a unfounded health scare i promised myself a brand new all singing all dancing camera ,and as i was nikon at the time it was a new d7100 24mp loads of tricks up it sleeve etc .
            the first one lasted 4 weeks and went tits up ,the replacement lasted 5 weeks till the same,i took around 6000 images with them in that time so plenty to go over ,when i actually started to process the shots i was never really happy ,the files were if anything 'to sharp" and just didn't look right ,i tried various combos of lenses and t.c's and borrowed lenses and nothing was right it lacked that quality i wanted . after both cameras broke i got a refund and in a fit of pique decided to come back to canon as i already had a 1dmk2 .sold all my nikon gear and bought my lads 60d and his girlfriends 120-400 sigma to get me going and got a 400mm f5.6 from bawbee on here .

            next stage i decided after a couple of weeks to upgrade (so i thought ) the 1d2 to a 7d ,did the wheeling and dealing and got one thats when it all started to go downhill quality wise ,i was in fact going backwards and that "something"was still missing. after looking on the juza forum where you can stipulate lens and camera sample pics i thought the 1d3 looks a good combo with my lens and made a couple of post on a couple of forums asking about that .someone on TP then offered to lend me his while he went on holiday .super bloke i'm extremely grateful to him .

            after the first batch of shots appeared on my mac my jaw was just hanging open ,there was the "quality " i had been looking for all these years .i can't get technical with it as some others ,perhaps a 1d4 or a 1dx would be even better ,but for what i do ,where i do it ,this does the job for me .took the bit between my teeth got xmas out the way first so as not to upset SWMBO sold the 7d the second night i put it on e/bay and the next day got a offer of my 1d3 from a forum member .

            and that your worship is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth

            Comment


              #7
              Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

              Very interesting challenge Nat has set. We have sensors of a whole raft of sizes (beyond '35mm film size'), pixel density, pixel size, Anti aliasing filter (or not), Bayer or not (like Fuji?), Backlit, (CMOS, NMOS or CCD), Gaia space telescope with it's Billion pixel camera (or my 3.3MPx Nikon 995 which I still might have somewhere) ...

              But the hunt for that illusive 'quality' goes on. One reason I kept my 40D.

              I keen to hear Jon's response as he's a technical person

              Comment


                #8
                Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                But the hunt for that illusive 'quality' goes on. One reason I kept my 40D.

                A bit confused here MX5. Are you saying that the quality of the 40D is much better than the modern camera bodies?
                Canon 6D; Canon 760D;Canon G15;Canon 40mm f2.8(Pancake);Canon 50mm f1.8(ii); Canon 17mm-40mm f4L;Canon EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM;Canon EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 STM lens;Canon 24mm-105mmf4L IS;Canon 70-300mm f4-f5.6 L IS USM;Kenko 1.4x HD TC;Canon 430EX ii flash;Giottos tripod;Manfretto monopod;Cokin P filters + bits and pieces!

                www.flickr.com/photos/nathaniel3390

                North Wales where music and the sea give a great concert!

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                  Are you saying that the quality of the 40D is much better than the modern camera bodies?
                  No Nathaniel.

                  Answer your own question from your own experience. If you wanted to take the best quality shot you can, would you use your 60D, or 6D?
                  Colin

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                    That's what I thought Colin but was a bit confused about the praise for the 40D which is actually "old technique" now. Perhaps I am not understanding MX5's comment correctly.Bit more clarification please.

                    I should add a good lens to a good camera body should result in a quality image.
                    Canon 6D; Canon 760D;Canon G15;Canon 40mm f2.8(Pancake);Canon 50mm f1.8(ii); Canon 17mm-40mm f4L;Canon EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM;Canon EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 STM lens;Canon 24mm-105mmf4L IS;Canon 70-300mm f4-f5.6 L IS USM;Kenko 1.4x HD TC;Canon 430EX ii flash;Giottos tripod;Manfretto monopod;Cokin P filters + bits and pieces!

                    www.flickr.com/photos/nathaniel3390

                    North Wales where music and the sea give a great concert!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                      i suppose its all down to application nat ,i would be totally lost doing some of the church interior shots you do ,and if i did landscapes or nudes or anything else i would go for a 5d3 or a 6d ,but i don't i shoot wildlife ,that by its very nature secrets itself in dark places ,moves extremely fast and you usually have to shoot off the cuff .i think the old adage applies here

                      HORSES FOR COURSES !!!!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                        (Slightly rushed this, but stuff to do, hope it makes sense...)

                        IMHO generally noise goes with overall sensor size, technology date and especially how clever a processor you have hung on the back of it doing noise reduction (or for Raw files how clever Raw processing software). Pixels count is largely irrelevant provided the light gets to them (so backlit sensors or gapless micro-lenses and light pipes). Phones have small sensors.

                        // long technical bit deleted as no-one would care... :-)

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                          Originally posted by Nathaniel View Post
                          That's what I thought Colin but was a bit confused about the praise for the 40D which is actually "old technique" now. Perhaps I am not understanding MX5's comment correctly.Bit more clarification please.

                          I should add a good lens to a good camera body should result in a quality image.
                          Certain sensors seem to hit a "sweet spot" of performance; both APS-C and APS-H 10MP Canon ones seem to be particularly good. Add to that the fact that the 40D was a particularly nice camera to use - the first really modern EOS DSLR, and it even sounded nicer than many other models. I sold mine in the summer because it hadn't been used for a couple of years apart from the odd bit of backup sports work to my 7D, but I actually miss it - it was a lovely camera, and produced very nice pictures. It's not actually better than (or indeed as good as) the 18MP output, just a lot better than anyone expected from 10MP, and still perfectly usable.
                          Please don't ask about my kit, it's embarrassing!

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                            I still sometimes use my 6mp d60 to get back into the habit in maximising subject in the sensor and therefore avoid cropping during processing. Cropping seems, to me, to be have a large impact on picture quality. So perhaps a native 10mg image might be better than a 18mp cropped to 10mp

                            PS The image quality from a D60 and the later 6mp 10D is still very good to A4 size providing no cropping is done
                            Last edited by briansquibb; 18-01-2014, 23:42.
                            ef-r

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Re: 10 mega pixels vs 20 megapixels

                              Over 10 years ago, when 4MP was the norm for Cameras (DSLR/bridge) I remember reading that the line in the sand when digital resolution would surpass 35mm film would be 6MP, well that dam has been breached and surpassed many times over. Even the entry level DSLR's are capable of producing superb images.

                              At one time the was a 'pixel war' mainly between Canon & Nikon, bigger is better was the mantra with both companies leap frogging each other in MP size sensors.

                              That has now flattened out, an example is the 1DX, to quote the old saying, it's not how big it is, it's how you use it, so modern sensors push other buttons, clean high ISO, increased tonal range etc, etc.

                              Regarding your original question Nat, regarding opting for a DSLR of 10mp instead of 18, while it's not a route I would take, I can possibly understand why folk may do it, an example is the 24-105 F4L lens, when I had one, it's a bit of glass I grew to hate with a venom, even though it's a highly regarded lens, most of the reviews ring it's praises. My head understood it was good, but my heart considered it a pile of crap, consequentlly I couldn't for the life of me take a decent image with it.

                              Another analogy (perhaps), I have a modern car, it does everything well effortlessly , has most of the bells and whistles you need, but it's when I get out on my 50 year old Lambretta that I get a huge smile, and I begin to actually enjoy motoring.
                              Last edited by Les McLean; 19-01-2014, 00:20.
                              Concentrate on equipment and you'll take technically good photographs. Concentrate on seeing the light's magic colours and your images will stir the soul. - Jack Dykinga
                              Light makes photography. Embrace light. Admire it. Love it. But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography- George Eastman

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X