Reading mode: Light Dark

FZx0, how many megapixels enough for you?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phil Askey
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
n/t
 
I'm quite happy with my 5-megapixel FZ20; at this juncture I don't want or need more. When I bought it, other aspects of the camera (that beautiful lens!) and its overall performance / image quality quickly sealed the decision for me.

When the FZ30 was released the last thing that interested me about it was its higher megapixel count. In the end I didn't see any compelling reasons to get the FZ30, and was happy enough to stick with my FZ20 and not upgrade to the FZ30.

That being said I will likely buy a DSLR soon - either the Nikon D70s or D50. Their 6.1 megapixels seem reasonable to me; I'm purposefully not considering other DSLR cams with higher megapixel specs. I don't chase megapixels. More is not necessarily better expecially at this end of the market in my view.

Doug
Dual 2.0 Ghz Power Mac
Panasonic FZ20
 
--
Steve

Fz20, Olympus c-3040, Minolta X20
 
Everyone seems to think that it is Panasonic who are obsessed with pixel count - yet everyone wants to view images at full res?

How about giving the engineers some credit - you take a 10Mp image, clean up the noise and down size to 5-6Mp equivalent

Haven't you now got a camera that is out performing those older 5-6Mp cameras ?

Isn't this what everyone is shouting for ?

cheers

twanger
 
If I couldn't get 8mp that were relatively noise-free I'd settle with 6mp for sure.

Damo

--
**********************************
'Most often the glass is more capable than the photographer behind it'.
http://www.designsbydamian.com.au
 
Pushing megapixels reduces performance. Pannys burst speeds used to be as high as 4 frames per second. Also performance is sacraficed with the lens... used to be f2.8 throughout. I want the new features Panny offers with some of the performance of it's prior cams. This can be done with a reduced megapixel sensor which requires very little noise reduction.

--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com
 
10 MB pixel are useless if the lens is not good.

Look at the 7 mpixel from canon. According to the reviews it was not able to take more details than the F11.

So if you really need more magapixel you just do quite fine taking a 6mega pixel from a good sensonr/lens and interpolate it to 10.

arguros
 
for starters. 20"x30" @ 300 DPI = 54MP would be better.
--
When a hammer is your only tool, all problems begin to look like nails.
 
My film scanner produces 9Mp files @ 2700dpi, so I'd like something roughly equivalent.

FZ30 noise at ISO 80 isn't objectionable for my mostly outdoor shots (and is definitely better than film!). The NR of the FZ50 samples I've seen to date goes way too far, though.

Why not ISO 50? Former Kodachrome/Velvia users like myself wouldn't find it that hard to get used to. The Exilim Z1000 is also 10 Mpix, and the ISO 50 sample shots I've seen are very acceptable as far as noise is concerned.
 
Kirwin said:
Pushing megapixels reduces performance. Pannys burst speeds used
to be as high as 4 frames per second. Also performance is
sacraficed with the lens... used to be f2.8 throughout. I want the
new features Panny offers with some of the performance of it's
prior cams. This can be done with a reduced megapixel sensor which
requires very little noise reduction.
Click to expand...
...and tiny pixels have decreased dynamic range, more blooming/purple fringing, etc.

An ISO200 as clean as ISO100 on the FZ20 would make the camera
so much more versatile!

--
emil
--



http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/
 
Frank Jones said:
My film scanner produces 9Mp files @ 2700dpi, so I'd like something
roughly equivalent.

FZ30 noise at ISO 80 isn't objectionable for my mostly outdoor
shots (and is definitely better than film!). The NR of the FZ50
samples I've seen to date goes way too far, though.

Why not ISO 50? Former Kodachrome/Velvia users like myself wouldn't
find it that hard to get used to. The Exilim Z1000 is also 10 Mpix,
and the ISO 50 sample shots I've seen are very acceptable as far as
noise is concerned.
Click to expand...
Because a pixel can only load up so many photons before it saturates
and your images have large areas completely blown. At some point,
the longer exposures entailed by
lowering the ISO actually decreases the dynamic range. That's why
lowest ISO has crept up from 50 to 64 to 80 and now 100 on the LX2.
The sensor's performance is actually worse at those lower ISO's, so they
don't give them to you as an option.

--
emil
--



http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/
 
Kirwin said:
Pushing megapixels reduces performance. Pannys burst speeds used
to be as high as 4 frames per second. Also performance is
sacraficed with the lens... used to be f2.8 throughout. I want the
new features Panny offers with some of the performance of it's
prior cams. This can be done with a reduced megapixel sensor which
requires very little noise reduction.
Click to expand...
Oh man if only they could come back with that 2.8 constant lens. That was one of the things that made the FZ20 "classy" in the first place (and whatever other Fluzis that shared that). So not only the FZ20 has less noise, but it can manage to use a lower iso at the telephoto end.
Kirwin said:
--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com
Click to expand...
--
Raist3d
Tools/Gui Programmer - vid games industry, photography student
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top