Digigraphica

High Megapixel Compact Digicams May Be Worse than We Thought

Dan Knight - 2008.02.21

del.icio.us Bookmark in del.icio.us

Low End Mac Reader Specials

Download Typestyler, still the Ultimate Styling Tool for Internet, Print and Video Graphics. Works great in Classic with a Native OS X Version on the way. Free Tryout: www.typestyler.com

LA Computer Company: LA Computer Company: Specials on AppleCare, Apple Displays, MacBooks, iMac's, MacBook Pros, Laptop and iPod accessories and more. Apple A/C Adapters for laptops starting at $25.00 Call 1-800-941-7654 or Click Here.

Other World Computing has the Upgrades, Enhancements, and Accessories for getting the most from your Mac. Quality Products, Competitive Prices, Expert Support Staff - www.macsales.com

Mac users can finally play Party Poker for Mac. Not only that, they can also learn how to play PokerStars for Mac.

Laptop Hardware Provided by TechRestore - Overnight Mac & iPod Repairs.

Compare products like desktop computers, laptops, and LCD TVs side by side! All the information and reviews to make the best purchasing decision for a new cell phone GPS products or MP3 players. The Ciao network makes searching products easy for you.

MacBook/MacBook Pro / MacMini / iMac Intel Core2 DUO DDR2 667Mhz 4GB Kit $84, 3GB Kit $60, 2GB Kit $40 1GB $20. Click to Maximize your Macs...

Last month we looked at the megapixel myth. As we noted then, "in the rush to market megapixels, images can actually be worse with a high megapixel camera than from a lower megapixel one."

The sad truth is that it's worse than we thought.

Mason Resnick of Adorama has exposed another issue caused by an unhealthy fixation on megapixels: As compact digicams include more and more megapixels on their tiny sensors, something has to give. In Stop the Megapixel Madness!, he says,

"...each pixel has its own microscopic lens, and each lens is separated by a microns-wide wall, or septum, to prevent light from falling from one pixel into the next and thereby reducing image quality . . . to make room for eight, nine, or (heaven help us, again) ten million pixels, those septums get either unusably thin, or are removed altogether."

The result of removing the septum? Spillover from one pixel another, which can cause fuzziness and increase noise (the digital equivalent of film grain).

As we've said before, 3 megapixels is all you need for a great 5x7, and most people can't tell the difference between an 8x10 from a 3 MP image or a 6 MP one. A 6 MP digital will easily give you a 12x18 print that looks very sharp indeed.

So why the fixation with megapixels? It's not quality, it's marketing. If 3 MP is better than 1.3 MP, and 6 MP is better than 4 MP, then 12 MP must be even better.

While it's true that more megapixels means better images that can be printed even larger on digital single lens reflex (DSLR) cameras, that's not always the case with compact digital cameras. Beyond a certain point, the small imagers with their increasingly small individual pixel sensor get small enough that digital noise becomes a factor. Your photos may have more pixels, but they are also likely to have a lot more grain.

Make the pixels small enough, and the septum (the dividers between the individual sensors), no matter how thin you make it, ends up cutting off some light, further increasing grain. The solution? For some manufacturers, it's removing the septum, which means that light can spill over to adjacent pixels.

The result is a lower contrast, grainier, fuzzier image, as Adorama clearly shows on its website. Too many megapixels in a compact digicam can mean worse images, not the better ones you would expect. And none of the manufacturers are going to make a point of telling you if they don't have a septum on their imager.

Don't believe it? Check out the comparison images that Adorama has posted (reduced even further below). Even when greatly reduced to 0.15 MP for use on the Web, those shot with an 8 MP DSLR look gorgeous, as everyone would expect. Those shot with an 8 MP compact camera look horrid: low contrast, washed out colors, more grain, and blurring of details. And there's nothing you can do in Photoshop to fix those problems.

You can, however, make matters even worse by shooting at a higher ISO setting. Again, it's something DSLRs can do well with their larger sensors, but as far as compacts go, it's going to further increase noise and graininess in your images.

DSLR vs. Compact
Comparison of 8 MP DSLR vs. 8 MP compact (reduced from Adorama website)

As Resnick notes, "You may be able to make big blow-ups with your 12MP compact, but they won't look as good as manufacturers want you to believe."

Don't buy a camera based on specs. All imagers are not created equal. All lenses are not created equal. And all 8 MP images are not created equal, and 8 MP may be more than you need. Kudos to Adorama, a camera retailer, for pointing out the truth.

Look at the images the camera creates. That's the true test, not the number of megapixels in its images.  LEM

Dan Knight has been into photography since 1973, worked at several camera stores over the years, and switched from film to digital several years ago. He is the publisher of Low End Mac.

Recent Digigraphica Columns

Recent Content on Low End Mac

About LEM | Support | Usage | Privacy | Contacts

Entire Low End Mac website copyright ©1997-2008 by Cobweb Publishing, Inc., unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. Advice presented in good faith, but what works for one may not work for all. Please report errors to .
  LINKS: We allow and encourage links to any public page as long as the linked page does not appear within a frame that prevents bookmarking it.
  Access our RSS news feed at http://lowendmac.com/feed.xml.
  Email may be published at our discretion; email addresses will not be published without permission, and we will encrypt them in hopes of avoiding spammers. If you prefer your message not be published, mark it "not for publication." Letters may be edited for length, context, and to match house style.
  PRIVACY: We don't collect personal information unless you explicitly provide it. For more details, see our Terms of Use.
  Low End Mac is an independent publication and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Apple Inc. Apple, the Apple logo, Macintosh, iBook, iMac, eMac, iPod, PowerBook, MacBook, Mac Pro, Apple TV, and AirPort are registered trademarks of Apple Inc. Additional company and product names may be trademarks or registered trademarks and are hereby acknowledged.


Have a question?
Ask an expert!

Low End Living

Amazon.com

Navigation

Used Mac Dealers
Apple History
Best Used Macs
Video Cards
Email Lists
InfoMac's Low
End Mac Forum

Favorite Sites

MacSurfer
MacMinute
MacInTouch
MyAppleMenu
InfoMac
Macs Only!
The Mac Observer
Accelerate Your Mac
RetroMacCast
PB Central
MacWindows
The Vintage Mac
   Museum
DealMac
DealsOnTheWeb
Mac2Sell
ramseeker
Mac Driver Museum
JAG's House
System 6 Heaven
System 7 Today
the pickle's Low-End
   Mac FAQ
Abandonware
   Petition
Mac vs. PC Info

Affiliates

The Apple Store
Mac Connection
MacMall
TechRestore
MacResQ
ExperCom
Crucial Memory
batteries.com

Advertise

All of our advertising is handled by BackBeat Media. For price quotes and advertising information, please contact at BackBeat Media (646-546-5194). This number is for advertising only.

Open Link

Problems viewing this page with Internet Explorer 5.5 or 6? It works fine in other browsers, including IE 7. We recommend Firefox for those using Windows, as it is standards based and more secure than IE 6 (and earlier). More LEM visitors use Firefox than any other browser.