Comments on: How Many Megapixels is That?

By: Texan In UAE

Texan In UAE — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 10:07:36 +0000

I found this out a couple months back. I was always the one that was asking. LOL Thanks for the nice informative article.

By: Danish Shah

Danish Shah — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 02:46:42 +0000

This is why i bought a Nikon D700 with 12.1MP sensor its rated one of the best noise performers

By: Ren_crow

Ren_crow — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 03:40:50 +0000

I always was amused by the whole obsession with megapixels. And btw not everybody who asks about megapixels on a new camera is a megapixel fanatic, it is after all part of a camera's specs.

I'd like to see myself wearing that 160 Mp camera hanging around my neck.

By: Mouazam

Mouazam — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:46:13 +0000

Hi Nidal,

Regarding the Canon vs Nikon debate, based on this megapixel thing it's fair to say that CURRENTLY nikon has the advantage in bodies. The reason for this is exactly what this article you wrote is discussing, nikon's full frame sensor say for the D700 has 12 MP so each pixel is bigger. Because of this that sensor has more dynamic range and a lot better high ISO performance compared to the canon equivalent, the 5d mark ii. Furthermore, the AF on the D700 is far far more accurate than the 5d mark ii. I had a 5d mark ii as well. It seems as canon is concentrating more on marketing for their bodies vs image quality, so they keep increasing pixel density by raising MP thus compromising high iso performance. What canon needs is a Full frame sensor with a low MP count, this will allow for better noise performance and faster fps since the processor has to process less data.

If someone is starting from scratch, currently Nikon has the better bodies by quite some margin, so I usually suggest those. But I am certain in the future, canon will come out with a FF and stop this MP race... there are a lot of rumors of a 3d, a FF low MP camera with a Pro AF.

By: Mouazam

Mouazam — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:39:36 +0000

I don't even know you, but it's good to see someone who is aware of this. I wrote a similar article once.

By: Oz

Oz — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:36:37 +0000

I always aim for Carl Zeiss . I hope that's good enough? Heck, I bought my N82 because of this!

By: NidalM

NidalM — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:27:29 +0000

As you might imagine, cellphone cameras currently use the smallest image sensors of all cameras. As a result, a 5MP cellphone will produce a much noisier image than a 5MP point-n-shoot. Theres many reasons for this, not just the sensor size. The flash is terrible for night shots and many phones use fixed optics (no autofocus) which is never optimum for all shots.

Cellphone cameras are improving steadily but I really wouldn't recommend them for any form of low light photography. For well lit shots which which are going to end up on facebook, a cellphone can't be beat, simply because you have one everywhere you go.

Since sensor sizes and technology vary a lot over cell manufacturers, I'd recommend reading up reviews for specific cellphones before going out to buy them if image quality will make a major factor in your buying decision.

By: phoeb

phoeb — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:07:30 +0000

So…what about the integrated cameras in cellphones? What maximum resolution would you suggest for a satisfactorily clear image? 8mp seemed noiseier than 5mp on nokia. Maybe something to do with the screen?

By: Chiara

Chiara — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:15:56 +0000

That “160 Megapixel baby” looks like a back to the future camera–heading towards being as big as the original box camera.

By: Chiara

Chiara — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:10:07 +0000

Hah!!!! For you I have to use Firefox Mozilla or whatever it is–fussy you are!