Why would anyone use a tablet when they can use a more powerful laptop instead? The answer should be obvious: Portability.
Generally speaking, an M43 system is smaller, lighter and has better stabilization than APS. Hence the appeal.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Long live 16MP
- Thread starter tt321
- Start date
Generally speaking, an M43 system is smaller, lighter and has better stabilization than APS. Hence the appeal.
shinndigg
Senior Member
Si sayssyou can't get a 16x20 from 16mp? I got a nice 30x40 from my lowly 12mp EPL 1
W
Wu Jiaqiu
Guest
W
Wu Jiaqiu
Guest
SirSeth
Veteran Member
For me, I don't get sick of increased MP counts for resolution and cropping. You can have too many pixels that are too tightly packed for clean low light shooting, but I prefer the former advantage rather than super clean low light (high ISO). Post processing noise on high resolution sensors is just easier imo so it's a disadvantage in pushing resolution higher that I think can be mostly overcome. Mind you I shoot 24mp FF along side my 5mp E-1 and will be adding 16mp E-M1 shortly. But I hope to see future generation of m4/3rds sensors pushing 30mp and FF pushing 60mp.
16mp on m4/3rds has outlived its useful life imo.
Cheers, Seth
16mp on m4/3rds has outlived its useful life imo.
Cheers, Seth
Considering the latest entry level Fuji has 24MP and PDAF, it’s a valid complaint. Fuji has moved beyond 16MP for their entire range. Seems like Olu/Panasonic still regard a 20MP sensor as some exotic piece reserved for flagship models. Except that the cheap Yi M1 uses one.
Silver
I agree that the 20mp sensor will indeed perform better than the 16mp sensor. But the results are not "knock your eyes out" but more a progression.
But in all product evolution there are devices where the size/performance equates more closely to what the customer truly needs. I would argue that up to the 16mp sensor there were always distinct advantages in a higher populated sensor that could easily be seen and appreciated.
By the 16mp sensor the images must be getting close to mass-satisfactory, even if not "best", and therefore many might well be very happy with what their 16mp sensors can do for them for quite a while.
The 20mp sensor is perhaps going beyond the mass expectation and my tired old eyes could hardly spot the difference. But I will go along with the ride and be happy that I now have 20mp even if I am and still remain happy with what my 16mp "lot". There is no way I am going to abandon my 16mp sensor bodies just because I have one with a 20mp sensor and the capability of the 16mp sensor was already hitting my own personal imaging "sweet spot".
I think that many will be using 16mp "sweet spot" sensors for year to come. Maybe pixel bloat is slowing down?
When 4mp went to 8mp there was a 100% increase in pixels
8mp to 12mp gave 50% increase
12mp to 16mp gave 33% increase
16mp to 20mp gave 25% increase
20mp to 24mp will give 20% increase
24mp to 30mp (yawn)
I now have a 20mp camera body and frankly I did not buy it for the extra pixels and I note that the ooc jpg file size seems much the same (if I bother to cross-check) and I hardly feel that my 16mp sensor cameras are in any disgrace. In fact 16mp for the 4/3 sensor seems to be a reasonable “sweet spot”.
Maybe we needed a quantum jump straight to 32mp?
Heck, my FF 5D has a miserable 12mp .... I remember being asked a few times by enthusiastic compact camera users (with wild eyed wonderment) “how many pixels does your camera have?”. Only followed by a dropped jaw and a steely re-assured look that “their” little point and shoot had more “megapixels” and their dealer had assured them that “more megapixels was good”.
Huh! ... that great big useless lump only had 12mp ....
R
Raist3d
Guest
it's not about just resolution, but also noise, DR, color sensitivity. there's something about it. The onlinephotographer.com has noticed it a few times both for PenF and GX8. I def. noticed it on my Pen-F.
I don't mind they stick to 16 MP *if* it was a new sensor with better color, iso. But nope, same old thing.
I don't mind they stick to 16 MP *if* it was a new sensor with better color, iso. But nope, same old thing.
alcelc
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 21,830
- Solutions
- 77
- Reaction score
- 10,751
if you are referring to EPL-9 and GF10...
In real life it would never be so good to have a 20Mp sensor well before the EM10/5 or GX...
--
Albert
Last edited:
SirSeth
Veteran Member
Completely agree. I think Olympus and Panasonic use what they can get. If the suppliers had m4/3rds as a priority than moving on from the 16mp champion of yesteryear might have happened already. I can't believe it's a choice to use less than the best. It's a financial and/or supply reality.
chriskeats
Senior Member
everybody wants lamborghini's to drive around the parking lot. I'm pretty happy with 16mp. and as far as iq goes, I borrowed my moms sony a200 for a bit a few years ago and frankly the 10mp out of that still looks better than most of my 16mp work. unfortunately getting it to cooperate was like beating a redheaded stepchild, so i'll stick with the panys. (and I shot film many years before digi so the mirror and ovf weren't exactly new to me)
R
Raist3d
Guest
I don't understand your reply to his. Doesn't seem to be on the same wavelength here. How come Y1 M1 uses the PenF sensor.
Silverback46
Senior Member
R
Raist3d
Guest
*with a kit lens* and yet it's $300 USD... right? I suppose the suggestion that Sony, a Japanese manufacturer, is giving YI Technologies, a Chinese manufacturer some concessions bore Japanese peers, is very hard to swallow.
--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell
I suppose the suggestion that Sony, a Japanese manufacturer, is giving YI Technologies, a Chinese manufacturer some concessions bore Japanese peers, is very hard to swallow.--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell
Last edited:
Arek Halusko
Senior Member
just better higher 6400+ iso detail/noise. If I could get 2 stops better iso on the Em1 with the 8MM FE 1.8 this would be an awesome camera for nightclubs/dark events/night time.
I got the a7s few weeks ago for that but man holding the Sony with the Rokinon 12mm AF vs Em1.1/Battery Grip/8MM is such a huge difference in balancesice and build quality over the Sony.
I got the a7s few weeks ago for that but man holding the Sony with the Rokinon 12mm AF vs Em1.1/Battery Grip/8MM is such a huge difference in balancesice and build quality over the Sony.
SirSeth
Veteran Member
Out of curiosity, have you driven a lamborghini around a parking lot? That may be the problem with that analogy.
SirSeth
Veteran Member
Supply and cost may dictate their perspective and differentiation. If there existed great new 18mp and 24mp sensors in the format, do you think they would still be differentiating their lines with a 16mp model. Sony and Fuji design their own sensors right? They can prioritize what they make for their cameras. Though I can't explain why the Y1M1 has a "higher end" sensor except that the rest of the camera might have been super cheap and they might be willing to suffer a loss on v1 to break into the market. I don't think it's smart for Panasonic and Olympus to differentiate with resolution, keeping entry level at 16mp unless there is a compelling financial or practical reason (like they can't get better from suppliers). They need the best sensor they can afford to put into every camera.
R
Raist3d
Guest
Not sure what this has to do with what I just said. Fuji designs sensors but they are manufactured by Toshiba or Sony (the Fuji X trans are Sony).
Y1M1 has the same supplier: Sony. That 20 MP is a better sensor, and it's not just resolution.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum