Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

    Fully sorted is a British 'slang' or colloquial phrase for something that has been repaired, modified to a higher standard, put back to full working order or improved on to your satisfaction. A problem rectified in other words.

    I think this is what crimbo meant. I happen to believe that a lot more could have been achieved with 12mp, but as Ian pointed out, improved dynamic range and high ISO low noise levels were really only achievable with the Sony 16mp sensor, I guess this is how Olympus saw it.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

      Originally posted by whatapicture View Post
      Fully sorted is a British 'slang' or colloquial phrase for something that has been repaired, modified to a higher standard, put back to full working order or improved on to your satisfaction. A problem rectified in other words.

      I think this is what crimbo meant. I happen to believe that a lot more could have been achieved with 12mp, but as Ian pointed out, improved dynamic range and high ISO low noise levels were really only achievable with the Sony 16mp sensor, I guess this is how Olympus saw it.
      Thanks :-) Since Olympus was not in the business of making the sensors themselves, going with the Sony 16Mega-pixel sensor with simultaneously higher resolution, better dynamic range, and lower noise was the way to go. The sensor manufacturers may not have been wiling to spend that much time and money on improving the existing 12 Mp sensor arrays.

      Thanks again, Mike

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

        In theory, a 12 MP sensor with the same design as the 16 MP Sony sensor would offer ever better dynamic range and high-ISO performance. Sony certainly could have produced one. I would assume that the 16 MP sensor is a custom part anyway, since no one but Olympus and Panasonic use 4/3-size sensors. So somewhere between Olympus and Sony, the decision was made to produce the 16 MP sensor that's now becoming standard across the Olympus MFT lineup (and the Panasonic GH-3, it seems). I never felt a need for the additional pixels, but I've been very pleased with all aspects of the performance of the new sensor. Still, I sometimes wonder how a 12 MP version would compare.

        - Hal -
        A Still Mind - Photography, Music, Meditation, Ministry - www.astillmind.net
        Olympus E-M5; Panasonic-Leica DG Summilux 25mm; Zuiko 12-60 SWD, 50-200 SWD; Sigma 105 Macro; Rokinon (Samyang) 7.5mm fisheye; Olympus 8/1.8 PRO fisheye; FL-50R; Giottos MT-8361 tripod with Gitzo GH2780QR ballhead.

        Comment


        • #49
          One of the reasons I mention it is that Sony make the sensors for Nikon...with the D3 they had a 12Mp D3s and a 24Mp D3x
          Now the s variant has (AFAIK) has better high ISO and dynamic range than the x variant.
          The lower pixel count also allows higher frame rates and a smaller file...
          ... would it be a sensible option for the new camera...imagine Olympus having two cameras out at the same time with the only difference being the pixel count....

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

            Its an interesting discussion and also interesting to see how each manufacturer tackles the pixel count/race. Pentax also use Sony sensors, such as the K30 and K5.
            One of the biggest improvements Olympus made way back was the E-450, it was only 10mp, but had a higher dynamic range than the E-510 and much lower noise than the E-620. The 450 is my favourite E camera.

            In recent reviews, the new 24mp Nikon D3200 exhibited slightly more noise at higher ISO than the 16mp Nikon's such as the D5100/D7000. Like wise, the 12mp Nikon D5000/D90 had even lower levels of high ISO noise and probably the best dynamic range in the Nikon APS-C family.

            Of course, its not all down to the sensor, the processing engine plays a large part as well. They have all made a rod for their own backs in a way, as ever more pixels requires ever more processing to keep noise levels down, some thing has to give way with all that processing. Some say the ultimate IQ was from 12mp!! I also believe that some compromises had to be made because of the movie mode.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

              Originally posted by whatapicture View Post
              Its an interesting discussion and also interesting to see how each manufacturer tackles the pixel count/race. Pentax also use Sony sensors, such as the K30 and K5.
              One of the biggest improvements Olympus made way back was the E-450, it was only 10mp, but had a higher dynamic range than the E-510 and much lower noise than the E-620. The 450 is my favourite E camera.

              In recent reviews, the new 24mp Nikon D3200 exhibited slightly more noise at higher ISO than the 16mp Nikon's such as the D5100/D7000. Like wise, the 12mp Nikon D5000/D90 had even lower levels of high ISO noise and probably the best dynamic range in the Nikon APS-C family.

              Of course, its not all down to the sensor, the processing engine plays a large part as well. They have all made a rod for their own backs in a way, as ever more pixels requires ever more processing to keep noise levels down, some thing has to give way with all that processing. Some say the ultimate IQ was from 12mp!! I also believe that some compromises had to be made because of the movie mode.
              Better IC denoising also allows more DR. However having the PL3 and the P2 at the same time I noticed that the PL3 had less noise but also visible artefacts.

              Secondly, I wonder if more DR is not perceived as a lack of realistic contrast.

              I'd need to have an E-M5 to tell. I am sure that there is a great progress in terms of sensitivity, but I am not convinced that at base ISO you don't have artefacts due to denoising.

              The trouble I see is that engineers are always pushed ahead by marketing, who probably don't give them the time to improve a new sensor.

              That also means that the second or third implementation of a sensor is better optimised, as noted in the case of the E-450. I sold the 620 because I found more noise at base ISO than in the 410.

              If this theory is true the sweet spot of the new sensor should be around 400-800 ISO, but with more native noise at base ISO.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

                I certainly don't have anything intelligent to add other than I have a horrible habit of keeping all of the pics I shoot except the out of focus ones. With the 12 megapixel files from my E-620 this has not been too much of a drain on my hard drive space. The jump to 16 megapixels has increased file sizes considerably and in my case this is in relation to JPegs let alone RAW files!
                I'm not sure what the hell I would do if I had a 24 megapixel sensor camera!!
                I guess it would mean that I would have to do some serious house cleaning and delete all but the best shots. More post processing work!

                I like the idea of the 16 megapixel sensor being put into an E series camera but I really think due to the physical size of the sensor that this should probably be where it should stay at least until there is a another huge jump in sensor technology and the compression engine built into the body to keep file size to a manageable one.
                Regards,

                Chris

                Since August 2013 all pics are taken with OMD EM-5 with the following lenses: 12-50 mm, 60 mm Macro, 40-150 mm and Lumix 20 mm 1.7. Prior to that it was an E-620 body and either the 9-18 or 50-200 SWD.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

                  I'm going for a bigger sensor. I just love to crop into the image.
                  And since I use low ISO most of the time I'm not really bothered by high ISO noice.

                  @Lucian_Rider. buy a new harddisk You'll need it. If not for the pictures then for all the video's that are in focus

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

                    Just bought a new TG-5, which has reduced pixels from the TG-4.

                    Quality of the photos are superb, but of course you cannot crop quite as much. But you have to ask yourself, how much of a photograph do you want. 100% works very well, but going down to say 20%, you are beginning to show the limits of the photo...................

                    Horses for courses I say.................

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: More megapixels or stay at 12MP but improve the quality?

                      Originally posted by Mj224 View Post
                      Just bought a new TG-5, which has reduced pixels from the TG-4.

                      Quality of the photos are superb, but of course you cannot crop quite as much. But you have to ask yourself, how much of a photograph do you want. 100% works very well, but going down to say 20%, you are beginning to show the limits of the photo...................

                      Horses for courses I say.................
                      what is it like in low light?

                      Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X