New Canon on 22nd March?

Started Mar 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
Senior MemberPosts: 2,703Gear list
Re: New Canon on 22nd March?
In reply to noirdesir, Mar 10, 2013

noirdesir wrote:

howardroark wrote:

The reason many of us refer to them as "war" is similar to the reason there was an HD format "war" between HD DVD and Blu Ray around the same time. There were two ways of thinking and they were like the old saying "there are only two kinds of people in this world" because there were very few people who were on the fence about the issue of more pixels versus better pixels. For a long time improvement came in the form of more pixels. There were very tiny technological advances in the pixels themselves but big manufacturing advances in getting more pixels on a chip. People wanted higher resolutions, but we also really, really wanted better image quality in the form of lower noise/higher useful ISO's (not to mention better dynamic range).

If your argument is that the quest for smaller pixels led to less investment into improving QE, saturation capacity and read noise, you might have a point. But then some of the same underlying technology improvements improved both pixel count and the signal quality.

A lot of companies were making huge jumps in pixel count but the noise got worse and worse.

Could you give us some examples? Because I don't remember any but then I did not follow things as closely ten years ago.

It seemed like DSLR's were heading the same way. Notice how many camera models over the last few years had fewer pixels than their previous iteration?

Again, the only example I remember was the Canon G11.

S1, 2004, 3.2MP, 1/2.5" (5.744 x 4.308 mm)

S3, 2006, 6MP

S5, 2007, 8MP

SX1, 2008, 10MP, 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm)

SX20, 2009, 12.1MP

SX30, 2010, 14.1MP

SX40, 2011, 12.1MP

SX50, 2012, 12.1MP

I put the sensor size next to the number of pixels for a reason:  pixel density is what really matters.  Other Canon lines had similar, or more alarming, trends.  Other manufacturers were worse and most people were glad when Canon pulled back a bit and concentrated on improving image quality rather than just raw pixel count.  Lenses on P&S cameras aren't usually that great to begin with, so ruining the images that already suffered from low detail resolution and/or distortion with more and more noise wasn't doing anybody any good.  DSLR lenses offered plenty of inferior selection that couldn't keep up with the sensors, but eventrually more and more affordable but high quality options were released.  I also mentioned the G line in another thread.  That one at least had a larger sensor so pixel densities weren't quite as ludicrous.

Many of the consumer lines had small chips like this example but were up at 18MP before they backed off.  I was glad that Canon didn't quite follow the pack as closely as others, but that goes to show that sometimes Canon resists market trends for a reason.

 howardroark's gear list:howardroark's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow