Image quality and megapixels, little has improved.

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:
 
Associate
Joined
16 May 2005
Posts
380
Location
Glasgow
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.
 
Associate
Joined
13 Oct 2004
Posts
1,243
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
 
Associate
Joined
20 Feb 2009
Posts
2,033
Location
Rugby
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
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
12 Oct 2003
Posts
4,027
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.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Feb 2003
Posts
10,631
Location
London
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 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.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Jan 2005
Posts
848
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!
 
Joined
16 Feb 2010
Posts
5,215
Location
North East England
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.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
1,968
Location
Nottingham
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.

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.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jan 2007
Posts
8,944
Location
Manchester
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.
 
Associate
Joined
20 Mar 2010
Posts
430
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.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Jul 2009
Posts
14,083
Location
Bath
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.
 
Back
Top Bottom