why compact point and shot cameras have more pixels?

amit

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
33
Hi
I really want to understand, and I dont really need more then my 16mp sensor.
But why almost all the tiny point and shot cameras with 1inch sensor or less- has at least 20mp? I tought that the size of the sensor limits the pixels...
 

MPrince

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 2, 2017
Messages
87
Location
West Virginia
Real Name
Matt Prince
Marketing 101: More is better.

People who don't really know any better fall for it every time.
 

agentlossing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
4,281
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
From what I understand, the higher MP count is a way to mitigate the somewhat lower image quality due to the smaller sensor size - but keep in mind, 1" is not that much smaller than M4/3. M4/3 sensors have reached 20MP as well, but here's the thing: 1" sensor compacts are premium cameras every one, while premium M4/3 cameras are also 20MP. The old 16MP sensor has stayed around because it got insanely cheap to produce and refined till it was considered still competent enough to put into the midrange lines for Olympus and Panasonic. But, considering today's offerings, the Oly EPL and EM10 lines, Panasonic GX850 and GX85/G85, all of these are midrange, not premium, models.
 

amit

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
33
From what I understand, the higher MP count is a way to mitigate the somewhat lower image quality due to the smaller sensor size - but keep in mind, 1" is not that much smaller than M4/3. M4/3 sensors have reached 20MP as well, but here's the thing: 1" sensor compacts are premium cameras every one, while premium M4/3 cameras are also 20MP. The old 16MP sensor has stayed around because it got insanely cheap to produce and refined till it was considered still competent enough to put into the midrange lines for Olympus and Panasonic. But, considering today's offerings, the Oly EPL and EM10 lines, Panasonic GX850 and GX85/G85, all of these are midrange, not premium, models.
Not only 1inch premium but also almost all the new lines of cheap point and shoot,and all the garbage china unbranded cameras I see on amazon.
What prevent olympus from making midrange 24mp and premium 30mp for example? is there a technical problem to do so?
I always thought that we have 20mp because there is no more room on the 4/3 sensor .
 

agentlossing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
4,281
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
Not only 1inch premium but also almost all the new lines of cheap point and shoot,and all the garbage china unbranded cameras I see on amazon.
What prevent olympus from making midrange 24mp and premium 30mp for example? is there a technical problem to do so?
I always thought that we have 20mp because there is no more room on the 4/3 sensor .
Slow sensor development and the fact that most of the M4/3 sensor manufacturers don't produce M4/3 cameras. The truth is, however, that most sensors are slow to develop - APS-C cameras have been 24 MP for a long time and we are just starting to see more ~30MP APS-C cameras. Blame the sluggish sales for system cameras first, the relatively low demand for M4/3 sensors second.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
454
Location
Covina, California
Not only 1inch premium but also almost all the new lines of cheap point and shoot,and all the garbage china unbranded cameras I see on amazon.
What prevent olympus from making midrange 24mp and premium 30mp for example? is there a technical problem to do so?
I always thought that we have 20mp because there is no more room on the 4/3 sensor .
sharp has an 8k m43 camera prototype with 33mp sensor so higher than 20mp on m43 is totally possible
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,148
Location
Southwest Virginia
Real Name
Steve
Kinotika did a low light test.
ISO 3200 at night looked good in my opinion. 6400 is debatable if it's usable but anything higher shows considerable noise. But those were my thoughts viewing the test footage on a 4k monitor. The footage res goes up to 8k if you have an 8k monitor.
Very interesting. I’d love to see some stills.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2018
Messages
454
Location
Covina, California
Olympus lowered the amount of pixels in the TG5 & TG6 cameras to make it better compared to past TG4.
So more pixels not always better
True but more pixels is not always worse for example look at high iso performance on m43 20mp sensors compared to their 16mp counterparts. High ISO Noise is for the most part identical if not a smidge better than the lower 16mp sensor.
 

TheMenWhoDrawSheeps

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
553
I noticed that too , can you explain how it makes things better?
it is pixel size vs pixel density vs technology of the pixels.
you have to understand that pixels are not equal sharpness. it is canvas, or medium to capture the light.
the bigger a pixel is, the more reliable data on luminosity it will provide and the less noise from that pixel you will get. lesser pixel count allows you process files in-camera faster.
on the other hand of the things, the more pixels you have, the more data you have to work with. iven if the signal is less precise than on bigger pixels, you get much more pixels to work with and to compute from. so the algorithm´s can reduce a bit of noise, and adjust the colour from raw sensor output more precisely.

anyhow it also depends on algorithms, processing power, technology etc. thats why some mobile phones can produce astonishing pictures despite smaller sensor size. they invest more in heavy algorithms and postprocessing. also there are different technologies of sensors, which alow much better resolutions, etc.

regarding sharpness - pixel count is the least thing you have to worry about regarding sharpness. sensor aren´t linear things, they are 2 dimensional, so you have to take into acount, that you increase your pixels on an arean, instead of straight line. so to 2x your detail, you have to 4x the pixel count. that means to have 2x the detail of 20mp sensor, you´ll have to get to 80MP.
also lenses aren't perfect. even with the best pro lineup, you will get 70-80% of the resolution. so a jump from 16 or even 12 to 20 or 24mp isn´t as big as you might think.
in most cases, you won´t be able to tell a difference. if the finest detail 2x2px wide on 12mp. it will be 3x3px on 24mp. you see just more pixels, not more detail. and that was an increase of sharpness by 50%.
in conclusion. 90% of all you hear is marketing and placebo. if someone tells you they can perceive difference between 20 and 24mp, spit them in the face.
 

agentlossing

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
4,281
Real Name
Andrew Lossing
Given the more efficient yields of smaller sensors cut form the wafer, industry found it far easier to advance sensor tech on smaller sensors.
There is also an argument to be made that heat management gets harder as the sensor gets bigger. Higher-powered processors use more current, thus higher energy loss, AKA heat. In a small sensor, the cumulative effect is less than with a bigger sensor.
 

Stanga

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
990
What prevent olympus from making midrange 24mp and premium 30mp for example? is there a technical problem to do so?
I always thought that we have 20mp because there is no more room on the 4/3 sensor .
There are more pixels per square mm on a 4/3rd sensor than on a FF sensor on at least the cameras that have been around for a while. So in technical terms, 4/3rd hasn't got a technical problem on the pixels front.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom