 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / General Topics / July 20067 MP still more noisy than 5 MP on mid-range cameras?
Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the picture than a 5MP camera. That was a while ago just as 7MP cameras were appearing on the lower mid-range cameras. Is this still true or have manufacturers started to compromise on the quality of their 5MP cameras such that 7MP is definitely less noisy and better now. I think I would like to get a 5MP low to mid range camera (smaller storage size for picture too) but I don't want to go against the trend in the marketplace because I will probably find there is now nothing being marketed for my sort of needs! I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would be exceptional. Take a look at this site http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html and compare some examples. Cheers > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the > picture than a 5MP camera. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would > be exceptional. Generally speaking, if the pixel count goes up while the sensor area remains the same, there will be more noise. Also, the higher ISO, the greater the noise. That being said, technical innovations applied to in camera processing have made improvements by reducing the effect of the noise. Sometimes this results in a slightly softer, less sharp image. Improvements in in-camera sharpening, and lens quality will improve the sharpness of the image. So will anti-shake features, and the use of a tripod. It depends on how big you want to make your prints. One of my cameras is only a 5 megapixel, and I get good prints up to 11" x 14" from it.  SignatureStan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS It's hard to soar with the eagles in the morning if you've been hooting with the owls all night. To reply, remove 101 from address. *** > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the > picture than a 5MP camera. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would > be exceptional. > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the > picture than a 5MP camera. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would > be exceptional. I went from a 2mp canon to a 5mp canon. My best 8x10 hanging on the wall is from the 2mp. If you don't intend printing larger than 8x10, 5mp is ample. Dave Cohen > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the > picture than a 5MP camera. More noise in the final print or more noise looking at 100% blown up crops? Big difference and most of the "techie" guys are complaining about noise looking at 100% crops on a computer screen. In an 8X10 print I doubt you'd ever see what these people are complaining about. SignatureStacey > > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise > > in the picture than a 5MP camera. > > > > More noise in the final print or more noise looking at 100% blown up > crops? > Big difference and most of the "techie" guys are complaining about > noise looking at 100% crops on a computer screen. In an 8X10 print I > doubt you'd ever see what these people are complaining about. The question of whether the noise matters is related to Susan's question, but was not the question she asked. The answer to Susan's question is something like this: All other things (sensor size and maker, for example) being equal, a 7MP camera is likely to have more noise than a 5MP camera. In the real world it isn't quite that simple. Fuji has has sensors with low enough noise that their engineers think they can do without image stabilization, for example. Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view, it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the image. I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost never make prints and have never in my life made a print that large. It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more noise than its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what she wants to do with her images. Paul Allen >Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view, >it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what >she wants to do with her images. I have an olympus stylus c710 and it has an ISO setting. The picture only gets really noisy on the iso100 setting. IIRC, the camera will automatically select iso100 in low light conditions. Given enough light, it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without visible noise. The noise is normally associated wit high ISO settings. If you are getting it at ISO 100, you are probably in very low light or are underexposing. SignatureStan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS It's hard to soar with the eagles in the morning if you've been hooting with the owls all night. To reply, remove 101 from address. *** >>Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view, >>it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without visible > noise. > >Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view, > >it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > light, it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without > visible noise. Hmmm... That's interesting. Noise levels pretty universally increase with the ISO setting. Perhaps the C710's noise-reduction doesn't kick in until you boost the ISO above 100, so it appears noisier at the lowest setting? My old Oly C700 had tolerable image noise at ISO 100, and the noise went from tolerable to impossible as the sensitivity went up. I've got about 10,000 images from that camera in my archives, but I haven't powered it on since my FZ30 arrived. :-) Paul Allen >> >Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view, >> >it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> light, it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without >> visible noise. >Hmmm... That's interesting. Noise levels pretty universally increase >with the ISO setting. Perhaps the C710's noise-reduction doesn't >kick in until you boost the ISO above 100, so it appears noisier at >the lowest setting? I just shot some test shots and I had it exactly wrong. The higher the iso, the more the noise. But back to what I was attempting to say: the noise on it's 7MP sensor is only a problem at some iso settings (higher). > I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were > to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise > in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost > never make prints and have never in my life made a print that large. > It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more noise than > its 5MP predecessor. But wasn't the FZ30's 5mp predecessor also noisier than its peers from other manufacturers? :) People quickly learn to live with their camera's limitations, so it's possible than many Panasonic owners simply avoid taking pictures in the lower light situations that would result in noticeably greater amounts of noise. Amounts that even NeatImage might not be capable of adequately cleaning up. > It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what > she wants to do with her images. True, but even if she'd want to use her images in ways that ways that would occasionally benefit from a more noise free camera, cameras such as the FZ30 can provide other advantages that would more than make up for the greater noise levels. > But wasn't the FZ30's 5mp predecessor also noisier than its peers > from other manufacturers? :) People quickly learn to live with > their camera's limitations, so it's possible than many Panasonic > owners simply avoid taking pictures in the lower light situations > that would result in noticeably greater amounts of noise. Amounts > that even NeatImage might not be capable of adequately cleaning up. This seems to be a topic of great debate even among owners - a popular opinion is that their noise reduction isn't as good as some other manufacturers, but as a trade off for this you actually get sharper more detailed images..... the 'improvement' in noise seen in the latest fz-50 sample images seem to point to this being true as the FZ50 uses a 10MP sensor yet manages to look like it has less noise than the 8MP FZ-30 (but possibly at the expense of detail - the FZ50 images seem to have a much stronger watercolour effect when viewed at 100% than the FZ30) > > I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were > > to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > But wasn't the FZ30's 5mp predecessor also noisier than its peers > from other manufacturers? :) Dunno. I paid close attention to Panasonic from the introduction of the FZ10 on. I didn't start hearing any complaints about noise until people started getting their hands on the FZ30. > People quickly learn to live with > their camera's limitations, so it's possible than many Panasonic > owners simply avoid taking pictures in the lower light situations > that would result in noticeably greater amounts of noise. Amounts > that even NeatImage might not be capable of adequately cleaning up. That's certainly the case with me. My old Oly C700 was terrible in low light, mainly because of its small sensor. The FZ30 is light years better in many ways, but it has similar low-light characteristics. If I really needed good low-light performance and was willing to put up with the extra cost, bulk, and weight, I'd have bought a DSLR. > > It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what > > she wants to do with her images. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > cameras such as the FZ30 can provide other advantages that would > more than make up for the greater noise levels. Well said. Perfection is illusive, so I settled on a camera with sufficient advantages that I can live with its disadvantages. It may turn out that buying the FZ30 just at the end of its product cycle was a bad move. I'm eagerly awaiting independent reviews of the FZ50, but will probably not be changing horses anytime soon. (My finance director says this camera has to hold me for a good long while.) Paul Allen > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the > picture than a 5MP camera. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would > be exceptional. It depends on the sensor design more than anything else. Regardless of megapixels, you'll find sensors that produce anywhere from 7 to 10 bits of clean data. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.