As usual, with these things, it's not that simple. Nikon and Sony came out with a 24MP sensor a few years ago, then a 36MP. Now Canon is coming out with 51MP cameras, and likely so will Sony and possibly Nikon. We've got 80MP backs for medium format, and scanning backs go to hundreds of MP.
What really matters is per pixel IQ, as long as they are equal, I'll take higher resolution any day. Even if the per pixel IQ is slightly less, much higher resolution allows binning, which still leaves you with, at a lower resolution, lower noise and a sharper image. And you still get the higher resolution for when you need it.
For smartphone cameras, the issue is somewhat different because of the tiny imaging sites, which are pretty much at the limit of practical lens resolution. So is the usage model. 8MP is high enough for a sharp 8x12. For most people, as long as they're not doing a lot of cropping, that's enough. The problem comes in because of the lack of optical zoom. Once you do crop, 8MP may not be enough.
But for Facebook, email, etc. it's fine.
I'm surprised that the megapixel race is still going on, and that camera manufacturers don't know better than to out megapixel the other guy. And this is Nikon and Canon, the seasoned veterans of pro photography equipment manufacturers, not a rookie like Samsung.
As usual, with these things, it's not that simple. Nikon and Sony came out with a 24MP sensor a few years ago, then a 36MP. Now Canon is coming out with 51MP cameras, and likely so will Sony and possibly Nikon. We've got 80MP backs for medium format, and scanning backs go to hundreds of MP.
What really matters is per pixel IQ, as long as they are equal, I'll take higher resolution any day. Even if the per pixel IQ is slightly less, much higher resolution allows binning, which still leaves you with, at a lower resolution, lower noise and a sharper image. And you still get the higher resolution for when you need it.
For smartphone cameras, the issue is somewhat different because of the tiny imaging sites, which are pretty much at the limit of practical lens resolution. So is the usage model. 8MP is high enough for a sharp 8x12. For most people, as long as they're not doing a lot of cropping, that's enough. The problem comes in because of the lack of optical zoom. Once you do crop, 8MP may not be enough.
But for Facebook, email, etc. it's fine.
Pro lenses aren't keeping up with resolution advances; analogous I suppose to mobile and batteries, but few are complaining.
More resolution is great, all else being (near) equal, but even now, the processors in dslr's are straining to meet frame rate expectations, and it does impose a need for some serious post processing power, which should make Intel, AMD and Nvidia very happy.
Apple is exactly right with a balanced workflow in the iPhone; there aren't any performance penalties and images look great even in low light conditions. Perhaps the release of Photos for OS X will push Apple to support a RAW workflow in both still and video for the next generation iPhone.
No doubt this article will illicit the usual comments from both sides. None of this would be necessary if people only understood that larger pixel count equates to more [I]flexibility[/I] in post rather than [I]quality[/I] per se, that assuming all else is of the highest quality. The reason I like my 22 MP sensor on Canon bodies is because I can crop and still hold high quality. On a consumer level camera where cropping is most likely mostly for straightening purposes and therefore minor in terms of data loss, of course 8 MP is great quality. That said ... I drool at the thought of Canon's new 50 MP sensors. :smokey:
I'm surprised that the megapixel race is still going on, and that camera manufacturers don't know better than to out megapixel the other guy. And this is Nikon and Canon, the seasoned veterans of pro photography equipment manufacturers, not a rookie like Samsung.
There is more to the MP count that simply perceived quality. Agreed in consumer products it is irrelevant unless you want digital zoom ability with no loss. Example, thanks to the 20+ MP on a Canon Tn range and others, you can digitally zoom x3 to still have a genuine 1080p video image. With the spread of 4K over the next few years 50 MP and up sensors will be required to allow digital zooming and still hold full resolution in video. It isn't about one up-manship at all. It's about flexibility.
I was in MacRumor's earlier and these nuts whining about this MP and that this is the reason for them to go to Android phones...I was laughing at these fking trolls...really? You buy a phone because of camera MP? Just plain idiots, I guess.
higher mega pixel means slower shooting; lesser quality photos, less post processing possible; more storage space used up on the phone; more data used for pushing photos up and down from the cloud; etc.
and there really is almost no benefit from higher mega pixels; unless you plan to print your photos larger than 8x10
higher mega pixel means slower shooting; lesser quality photos, less post processing possible; more storage space used up on the phone; more data used for pushing photos up and down from the cloud; etc.
and there really is almost no benefit from higher mega pixels; unless you plan to print your photos larger than 8x10
Unless you want to have a digital zoom with almost no quality loss. Apple will use a higher count when they feel the time is right it it won't be anything to do with marketing.
I was in MacRumor's earlier and these nuts whining about this MP and that this is the reason for them to go to Android phones...I was laughing at these fking trolls...really? You buy a phone because of camera MP? Just plain idiots, I guess.
I would agree, if you need a higher pixel count for genuine reasons you also need better hardware all around. Most people need neither. That said, as i have just posted I can bet Apple will up the MP count when they have a technological reason for it, not to impress people.
Them staying out of it for the LAST SEVEN IPHONES wasn’t convincing enough?
Well they did offer only one size iPhone for 5 generations -- the "perfect size", before offering a slightly larger "more perfect" iPhone; and now the current Phablet-sized 6 Plus, which by statement and practice was exactly something they suggested they would never do.
But you can bet they will market the heck out of the fact they did it.
Yes and no. I would expect Phil will definitely expound on the reasons why they added it, if and when they do, at launch but I doubt you'll see it mentioned in large letters anywhere, simply part of the Tech Spec on the Apple web site for the product in question.
I realize that Photos is coming soon, but I think Apple has far to go in terms of UI to manage photos. It's currently a freaking mess. Camera Roll and Photo Stream never match, most users don't know the difference and after having to restore photos from a backup folder on my Mac, I now can't add or delete photos from those "Albums" on the phone. It needs to work well for users who don't want to pay for iCloud.
True. When my wife and I got our new iPhone 6's, I was surprised at the new iOS and how it managed photos. I just turned off all sharing and we import our photos the "old fashioned" way: connect via USB to our MacBook Pro and import into iPhoto. No duplicates, no missed photos, all backed up via Time Machine.
Smart move on their part. 8MP is totally fine for a 8x10in prints and happy snaps. The problem I see is the zoom factor and image fidelity. If people want a prof-grade camera they have the option to purchase an SLR with all its bells-n-whistles. If Apple keeps improving the camera system/lenses and sensor fidelity, I think they can stay at 8 for quite some time.
Well they did offer only one size iPhone for 5 generations -- the "perfect size", before offering a slightly larger "more perfect" iPhone; and now the current Phablet-sized 6 Plus, which by statement and practice was exactly something they suggested they would never do.
I don’t get your point. Apple has never suggested anything about their cameras. That’s completely irrelevant.
I was in MacRumor's earlier and these nuts whining about this MP and that this is the reason for them to go to Android phones...I was laughing at these fking trolls...really? You buy a phone because of camera MP? Just plain idiots, I guess.
While the lens/sensor is easily the most important aspect of the camera, MP isn't completely irrelevant. Otherwise, Apple would be using the original 0.3MP resolution of the early (prior to iPhone) cameras. All in all, however, Apple makes an amazing point and shoot camera for the iPhone.
Megapixel cock-waving is perfect for people who do not understand physics—specifically diffraction-limited systems. If you don’t know what that means, look it up, then tell us again why a phone camera module with a lens smaller than my pinky nail should have a 20 megapixel—or even more absurd—sensor.
Megapixel cock-waving is perfect for people who do not understand physics—specifically diffraction-limited systems. If you don’t know what that means, look it up, then tell us again why a phone camera module with a lens smaller than my pinky nail should have a 20 megapixel—or even more absurd—sensor.
Not absurd. Why do you want to exceed the diffraction limit? Bayer filter and aliasing.
higher mega pixel means slower shooting; lesser quality photos, less post processing possible; more storage space used up on the phone; more data used for pushing photos up and down from the cloud; etc.
and there really is almost no benefit from higher mega pixels; unless you plan to print your photos larger than 8x10
Or you're cropping the image quite a bit! Zooming into the part you saved. A Higher MP would matter more in this case. Again, that's not a normal thing people do. I don't remember the last time I went and cropped a picture. Unless you're cropping something that's way out in the distance, a higher MP is just pointless. You can get great 8x11 pictures with a 5MP camera, so 8MP is more then good enough for large poser size.
I don’t get your point. Apple has never suggested anything about their cameras. That’s completely irrelevant.
Then I guess I missed yours. I thought your point was that Apple hasn't been in the megapixel race for 7 generations, usually downplaying its relevance, so why expect something different now?
And mine in response was that they stayed out of the size-race, downplaying its importance, until now. In other words, past performance is NEVER a guarantee for Apple to do anything.
What would be totally kick-ass is for them to somehow put a full frame sensor into the iPhone, they could still stay at 8MP as well. That would be interesting. Don't see that happening, but I wonder if it's even possible? They would probably have to make the lens bigger I would imagine.
Comments
I'm surprised that the megapixel race is still going on, and that camera manufacturers don't know better than to out megapixel the other guy. And this is Nikon and Canon, the seasoned veterans of pro photography equipment manufacturers, not a rookie like Samsung.
As usual, with these things, it's not that simple. Nikon and Sony came out with a 24MP sensor a few years ago, then a 36MP. Now Canon is coming out with 51MP cameras, and likely so will Sony and possibly Nikon. We've got 80MP backs for medium format, and scanning backs go to hundreds of MP.
What really matters is per pixel IQ, as long as they are equal, I'll take higher resolution any day. Even if the per pixel IQ is slightly less, much higher resolution allows binning, which still leaves you with, at a lower resolution, lower noise and a sharper image. And you still get the higher resolution for when you need it.
For smartphone cameras, the issue is somewhat different because of the tiny imaging sites, which are pretty much at the limit of practical lens resolution. So is the usage model. 8MP is high enough for a sharp 8x12. For most people, as long as they're not doing a lot of cropping, that's enough. The problem comes in because of the lack of optical zoom. Once you do crop, 8MP may not be enough.
But for Facebook, email, etc. it's fine.
Pro lenses aren't keeping up with resolution advances; analogous I suppose to mobile and batteries, but few are complaining.
More resolution is great, all else being (near) equal, but even now, the processors in dslr's are straining to meet frame rate expectations, and it does impose a need for some serious post processing power, which should make Intel, AMD and Nvidia very happy.
Apple is exactly right with a balanced workflow in the iPhone; there aren't any performance penalties and images look great even in low light conditions. Perhaps the release of Photos for OS X will push Apple to support a RAW workflow in both still and video for the next generation iPhone.
There is more to the MP count that simply perceived quality. Agreed in consumer products it is irrelevant unless you want digital zoom ability with no loss. Example, thanks to the 20+ MP on a Canon Tn range and others, you can digitally zoom x3 to still have a genuine 1080p video image. With the spread of 4K over the next few years 50 MP and up sensors will be required to allow digital zooming and still hold full resolution in video. It isn't about one up-manship at all. It's about flexibility.
I was in MacRumor's earlier and these nuts whining about this MP and that this is the reason for them to go to Android phones...I was laughing at these fking trolls...really? You buy a phone because of camera MP? Just plain idiots, I guess.
higher mega pixel means slower shooting; lesser quality photos, less post processing possible; more storage space used up on the phone; more data used for pushing photos up and down from the cloud; etc.
and there really is almost no benefit from higher mega pixels; unless you plan to print your photos larger than 8x10
Unless you want to have a digital zoom with almost no quality loss. Apple will use a higher count when they feel the time is right it it won't be anything to do with marketing.
I would agree, if you need a higher pixel count for genuine reasons you also need better hardware all around. Most people need neither. That said, as i have just posted I can bet Apple will up the MP count when they have a technological reason for it, not to impress people.
Them staying out of it for the LAST SEVEN IPHONES wasn’t convincing enough?
Well they did offer only one size iPhone for 5 generations -- the "perfect size", before offering a slightly larger "more perfect" iPhone; and now the current Phablet-sized 6 Plus, which by statement and practice was exactly something they suggested they would never do.
Apple will use a higher count when they feel the time is right it it won't be anything to do with marketing.
But you can bet they will market the heck out of the fact they did it.
Yes and no. I would expect Phil will definitely expound on the reasons why they added it, if and when they do, at launch but I doubt you'll see it mentioned in large letters anywhere, simply part of the Tech Spec on the Apple web site for the product in question.
I realize that Photos is coming soon, but I think Apple has far to go in terms of UI to manage photos. It's currently a freaking mess. Camera Roll and Photo Stream never match, most users don't know the difference and after having to restore photos from a backup folder on my Mac, I now can't add or delete photos from those "Albums" on the phone. It needs to work well for users who don't want to pay for iCloud.
True. When my wife and I got our new iPhone 6's, I was surprised at the new iOS and how it managed photos. I just turned off all sharing and we import our photos the "old fashioned" way: connect via USB to our MacBook Pro and import into iPhoto. No duplicates, no missed photos, all backed up via Time Machine.
I don’t get your point. Apple has never suggested anything about their cameras. That’s completely irrelevant.
I was in MacRumor's earlier and these nuts whining about this MP and that this is the reason for them to go to Android phones...I was laughing at these fking trolls...really? You buy a phone because of camera MP? Just plain idiots, I guess.
While the lens/sensor is easily the most important aspect of the camera, MP isn't completely irrelevant. Otherwise, Apple would be using the original 0.3MP resolution of the early (prior to iPhone) cameras. All in all, however, Apple makes an amazing point and shoot camera for the iPhone.
Megapixel cock-waving is perfect for people who do not understand physics—specifically diffraction-limited systems. If you don’t know what that means, look it up, then tell us again why a phone camera module with a lens smaller than my pinky nail should have a 20 megapixel—or even more absurd—sensor.
Megapixel cock-waving is perfect for people who do not understand physics—specifically diffraction-limited systems. If you don’t know what that means, look it up, then tell us again why a phone camera module with a lens smaller than my pinky nail should have a 20 megapixel—or even more absurd—sensor.
Not absurd. Why do you want to exceed the diffraction limit? Bayer filter and aliasing.
all else being equal...
higher mega pixel means slower shooting; lesser quality photos, less post processing possible; more storage space used up on the phone; more data used for pushing photos up and down from the cloud; etc.
and there really is almost no benefit from higher mega pixels; unless you plan to print your photos larger than 8x10
Or you're cropping the image quite a bit! Zooming into the part you saved. A Higher MP would matter more in this case. Again, that's not a normal thing people do. I don't remember the last time I went and cropped a picture. Unless you're cropping something that's way out in the distance, a higher MP is just pointless. You can get great 8x11 pictures with a 5MP camera, so 8MP is more then good enough for large poser size.
I don’t get your point. Apple has never suggested anything about their cameras. That’s completely irrelevant.
Then I guess I missed yours. I thought your point was that Apple hasn't been in the megapixel race for 7 generations, usually downplaying its relevance, so why expect something different now?
And mine in response was that they stayed out of the size-race, downplaying its importance, until now. In other words, past performance is NEVER a guarantee for Apple to do anything.
What would be totally kick-ass is for them to somehow put a full frame sensor into the iPhone, they could still stay at 8MP as well. That would be interesting. Don't see that happening, but I wonder if it's even possible? They would probably have to make the lens bigger I would imagine.