FZx0, how many megapixels enough for you?

Hi Phil

6 or 7MP max for the 1/1.8" CCD and like a few of the others would like to see an ISO50 and constant f2.8 again like my FZ10. A larger sensor would be even better - 2/3 or a 1" (hey I can dream) and for that sized sensor 6MP would be enough. If that meant a bigger lens and larger body I'd be more than happy if that meant IQ was top of the list. Another change I'd like to see them introduce is the ability increase the ISO in steps of 50 like the Oly 8080.

Cheers

HarjTT

; o )>

To the first approximation, noise and resolution are inversly related. That is, a 20% drop in MP gives 10% less resolution and 10% more noise. So, it's not like dropping the MP count is going to give some tremendous decrease in noise.

Suppose you went to 5 MP (I don't think anything under that would sell.) That's 40% less noise. That means you can (gasp) now shoot at ISO 140 instead of ISO 100. Don't all die of excitment at once. Not even half a stop difference.

You'll never beat the F30 in the ISO race by doing removing pixels. Assume it can do at ISO 200 what the FZ50 can at ISO 80. Without changing the basic Panasonic technology you'd have to go down to 4 MP to match the Fuji.

Some people might tell you the F30 could go up to ISO 400 while still matching the FZ50. On paper, the FZ50 would have to go to 2 MP to equal this.

Plus, you can alway take a 10 MP and filter it to lower equivalent resolution w/less noise. It's amazing to me the number of people who complain that that a camera is filtering out all the detail at high ISO. . . and then want a 4 MP sensor as a solution. A 4 MP sensor is just a filter of another type, but you have no option to go back to higher resolution when you need it.

So, what you really want if Fuji technology in a Panasonic body - which probably isn't going to happen soon.

i print a lot of 20x16 inch pics and they do come out fantastic from my FZ30 i would be happy with 8mp and a better iso performance,though i must admit i take most pics dureing the day anyway so the noise problem had been a non issue with me

Gives enough info to print any 4x6 (the most common size), but with enough slack for some cropping.

--
-Eric
------
Olympus 3040
Panasonic FZ-20
Minolta XG7 - Minolta MC 1.7/55
FED 2 - Industar 26, 61 L/D
Kiev 4 - Jupiter 3, 8, 12
Praktiflex FX - CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 T*

--
Pat
http://antara.smugmug.com

tko said:

To the first approximation, noise and resolution are inversly
related. That is, a 20% drop in MP gives 10% less resolution and
10% more noise. So, it's not like dropping the MP count is going to
give some tremendous decrease in noise.

Click to expand...

A real world comparison is FZ15/20. Look at the Imatest results at
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/FZ20/FZ20IMATEST.HTM

At ISO100, the 4MP FZ15 has about 70-75% of the noise of
the 5MP FZ20. Furthermore, another figure of merit is noise
at lowest (ie optimal) ISO. Here the FZ20 can only go to ISO80
while the FZ15 has ISO64 due I presume to its larger pixels
being able to accept more photons before saturation.
Noise at lowest ISO then has roughly 40% less noise for the FZ15
relative to the FZ20. Or if you like, the noise of the FZ15 at ISO200
is about the same as that of the FZ20 at ISO80, if the test was
accurate.

tko said:

Suppose you went to 5 MP (I don't think anything under that would
sell.) That's 40% less noise. That means you can (gasp) now shoot
at ISO 140 instead of ISO 100. Don't all die of excitment at once.
Not even half a stop difference.

Click to expand...

See above. Noise curves are not so linear as you make them out,
nor do they adhere so precisely to the rough rule of thumb
of your analysis.

--
emil
--



http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/

F2.8 throughout the full range and bring back 50 iso.
Fire the marketing team

I am glad the general public has become more educated on this issue in the last year.

Sometimes if you live long enough the world begins to see things your way......Except for nerds of the extreme variety.

Thank you Phil for your high standards and hope you continue fighting for better cameras.

Harlan
--
http://www.pbase.com/harlanjs

I don't have a problem with noise but like the detail of the FZ30's 8 meg sensor. Plenty of room for noise reduction if need be and still to keep some detail. The more pixels the better- great for bug macros when heavy cropping comes into play. Would like to get a 12 MP camera in the next few years, and if I really want high ISO, then I'll spring for a DSLR. I realize the limits of these "point and shoot" CCD sensors. I also don't think that lowering the pixel count will lower the noise that much (or at least as much vs. the tradeoff in resolution).

--
my FZ30 pictures at: http://www.memoriesinmosaic.com/16.html

--

The Amateur Formerly Known as 'UZ'pShoot'ERS' 'Happy Shootin' Comments, Critique, Ridicule, Limmericks, Jokes, Hi-jackings, EnthUZIastically, Encouraged... I Insist!



* [email protected] * http://www.pbase.com/rrawzz * EffZeeThreeZero / CeeEightZeroEightZeroDoubleUZee / CeeTwoOneZeroZeroUZee / EOneHuderedAreEss

It's never simple, but also remember that the noise reduction, image processoring, and the resulting resolutoin play a big part, so it's very hard to do a real comparision between different cameras.

When I used Neat Image to analysis the noise in my FZ10 and FZ30 pictures the difference was only 20%. Maybe my test wasn't valid, but my only point is that reducting the MP isn't going to make some tremendous difference in noise. I mean, some people want clean ISO 1600 by going to 5 MP. It just isn't gone to happen, based on MP along.

5 mp for me with an ISO 64 would be enough for what I do. I never go past 64 anyway and all my shots are great!

Hi, Harlan! Are you in Costa Rica nowadays? Photo ops?

I started with a Panny DMC-LC33 which was a good 3.2MB pocket camera. Noise not great but acceptable for 2003. When I decided to upgrade I picked the FZ15 rather than the FZ20 to lower noise. Been quite happy with it.

I do like my Nikon D50 DSLR with a 6MP sensor; it showed me what low noise meant. Quite enough for my poor talents. As is a 4MP Canon A520. My newest is a 7MP Canon A620 which I love apart from it being a bit large for a carry around camera.

So far, my feeling is that the person behind the machine is more important than the machine, assuming the latter has basic competence.

...no text

Since 8x10 would be the largest I would print I think that 6-7 Good Mp would be fine.
--
Neil

Then I'd stick with the 8MP of the FZ30. I'm getting tired of of these noise "workarounds" when --- IT'S THE SENSOR, STUPID! ) But hey, that's just my 2 kopeks...
--
Best Wishes,
Steve
http://trailhiker.smugmug.com

--
Kimnicho
http://kimnicho.smugmug.com/
Use my smugmug code: and Save $5

Sure wish that Phil would expound upon the issue. His opinions are quite valued.

Not to make more work for someone, but will somebody tally and summarize the results?

theranman said:

KILL THE PIXEL STUFFERS!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

The Japanese are the hard-working ants. They do not have their own opinion of how many pixels to stuff into the CCD sensor and they do not do such decisions; they just manufacture what they think will sell in the Western markets. And you the westerners are trained by the marketing and sales staff to want to have more pixels ! Moreover, guess what, the marketing and sales people do not come up with these requirments out of nothing; they are the people who are just like YOU and coimng from the same origins !