Do We Really Need All Those Megapixels

[duptyfied 0]

We have digital cameras today that that just keeping increasing on the megapixels but is that the only thing that can be done to improve picture clarity? More megapixels relates to larger image size, which means you have to pay more for higher capacity memory cards.I have seen pictures taken by a 3 megapixel camera, which was blown up to a poster that was about 4ftX3ft and the clarity was pretty good. May be more megapixel translates into better digital zoom, which has cheaper manufacturing cost compared to the manufacturing cost of optical zoom. Ironically I have notice that the low cost cameras have a low optical zoom as well as low megapixels translating to low digital zoom as well. It begins to look more like a marketing strategy for digital cameras than anything else.

Edited April 16, 2012 by duptyfied (see edit history)

[yordan 10]

OK, first of all, a good camera has a really wide lens (typically more than four centimeters).This gives you a nice image, when correctly focused.After that, you have to record this image on a permanent medium. If possible, the same resolution as the current chemical films.You must know that the current resolution on current resolution on current chemical films is about ten micrometers, which means 100 dots per millimeter.So, for a current 24*36 picture, this leads to about 86 millions pixels for a current low-cost silver-chemical-film camera.Of course, a profession camera should have far more than that, at least 20 times more (4 times higher and 5 times wider image for current professional cams).That's why the photography sensors must have constantly more and more pixels. You don't need all these pixels on your own camera, but you take benefit on your own camera from all these research efforts for professional cams. And remember that you can smoothen your pictures over a lot of pixels in order to have a 1meg picture stored on your memory card.And still remember that you need a wide lens on your camera. If your lens diameter is about two millimeters instead of four centimeters, you will have poor pictures, no matter how many pixels the sensor behind the lens exhibits.Exactly like in your house : if you have a nice big clean window, you will see a nice landscape. If you have a very small window, the landscape will be far less impressive.

[duptyfied 0]

Thanks Yordan!You have a point there with the lens size but concerning the megapixels I feel that 5 megapixel is more than enough for any common user and may be 8 megapixels for a professional, what I feel digital camera need to work more on is the ISO, which helps the camera take out better picture in low light conditions. In low light conditions, the exposure is longer due to which there could be blurring due to movement. If cameras could focus more on the ISO light sensitivity and made it auto adjustable to the environment conditions then it would greatly help the clarity while keeping the image size small. Or may be they can develop an image format, which is rich in quality yet small in size like how we have mp3 concerning music.

[yordan 10]

what I feel digital camera need to work more on is the ISO, which helps the camera take out better picture in low light conditions. In low light conditions, the exposure is longer

Still the same problem. If the lens size is small, very few light come on the sensor, so low ISO. With big lenses, a lot of lite comes on the sensor, so the ISO ratio is better, and you can use a faster speed for the same picture under low light conditions.

[duptyfied 0]

Yordon, your right in saying that buddy,Along with increasing the lens size, I think those lenses which are used in night vision that draw in maximum light would also come in handy especially in low light conditions.