7 MP still more noisy than 5 MP on mid-range cameras?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Susan P, Jul 30, 2006.

  1. Susan P

    Susan P Guest

    Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the
    picture than a 5MP camera.

    That was a while ago just as 7MP cameras were appearing on the lower
    mid-range cameras.

    Is this still true or have manufacturers started to compromise on the
    quality of their 5MP cameras such that 7MP is definitely less noisy and
    better now.

    I think I would like to get a 5MP low to mid range camera (smaller
    storage size for picture too) but I don't want to go against the trend
    in the marketplace because I will probably find there is now nothing
    being marketed for my sort of needs!

    I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would
    be exceptional.
     
    Susan P, Jul 30, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Susan P

    dylan Guest

    Take a look at this site
    http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware_reviews.html and compare some
    examples.

    Cheers

    Susan P wrote:
    > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the
    > picture than a 5MP camera.
    >
    > That was a while ago just as 7MP cameras were appearing on the lower
    > mid-range cameras.
    >
    > Is this still true or have manufacturers started to compromise on the
    > quality of their 5MP cameras such that 7MP is definitely less noisy and
    > better now.
    >
    > I think I would like to get a 5MP low to mid range camera (smaller
    > storage size for picture too) but I don't want to go against the trend
    > in the marketplace because I will probably find there is now nothing
    > being marketed for my sort of needs!
    >
    > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would
    > be exceptional.
     
    dylan, Jul 30, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Susan P

    m Ransley Guest

    New sensors are better noise is going down, they dont compromise the 5
    mp, why would they. You have to do your own comparison reading some 7mp
    are noisier some are not. I though all I would ever want or need was a
    5mp, till I bought one.
     
    m Ransley, Jul 30, 2006
    #3
  4. Susan P

    Stan Beck Guest

    Generally speaking, if the pixel count goes up while the sensor area remains
    the same, there will be more noise. Also, the higher ISO, the greater the
    noise.

    That being said, technical innovations applied to in camera processing have
    made improvements by reducing the effect of the noise. Sometimes this
    results in a slightly softer, less sharp image. Improvements in in-camera
    sharpening, and lens quality will improve the sharpness of the image. So
    will anti-shake features, and the use of a tripod.

    It depends on how big you want to make your prints. One of my cameras is
    only a 5 megapixel, and I get good prints up to 11" x 14" from it.

    --
    Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS

    It's hard to soar with the eagles in the morning if you've been hooting with
    the owls all night.

    To reply, remove 101 from address.
    ***

    "Susan P" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns98107746B470DD5E712@127.0.0.1...
    > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the
    > picture than a 5MP camera.
    >
    > That was a while ago just as 7MP cameras were appearing on the lower
    > mid-range cameras.
    >
    > Is this still true or have manufacturers started to compromise on the
    > quality of their 5MP cameras such that 7MP is definitely less noisy and
    > better now.
    >
    > I think I would like to get a 5MP low to mid range camera (smaller
    > storage size for picture too) but I don't want to go against the trend
    > in the marketplace because I will probably find there is now nothing
    > being marketed for my sort of needs!
    >
    > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would
    > be exceptional.
     
    Stan Beck, Jul 30, 2006
    #4
  5. Susan P

    Dave Cohen Guest

    Susan P wrote:
    > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the
    > picture than a 5MP camera.
    >
    > That was a while ago just as 7MP cameras were appearing on the lower
    > mid-range cameras.
    >
    > Is this still true or have manufacturers started to compromise on the
    > quality of their 5MP cameras such that 7MP is definitely less noisy and
    > better now.
    >
    > I think I would like to get a 5MP low to mid range camera (smaller
    > storage size for picture too) but I don't want to go against the trend
    > in the marketplace because I will probably find there is now nothing
    > being marketed for my sort of needs!
    >
    > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would
    > be exceptional.


    I went from a 2mp canon to a 5mp canon. My best 8x10 hanging on the wall
    is from the 2mp. If you don't intend printing larger than 8x10, 5mp is
    ample.
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Jul 30, 2006
    #5
  6. Susan P

    Stacey Guest

    Susan P wrote:

    > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the
    > picture than a 5MP camera.
    >


    More noise in the final print or more noise looking at 100% blown up crops?

    Big difference and most of the "techie" guys are complaining about noise
    looking at 100% crops on a computer screen. In an 8X10 print I doubt you'd
    ever see what these people are complaining about.

    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Jul 30, 2006
    #6
  7. Susan P

    Paul Allen Guest

    On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 11:48:23 -0400
    Stacey <> wrote:

    > Susan P wrote:
    >
    > > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise
    > > in the picture than a 5MP camera.
    > >

    >
    > More noise in the final print or more noise looking at 100% blown up
    > crops?


    > Big difference and most of the "techie" guys are complaining about
    > noise looking at 100% crops on a computer screen. In an 8X10 print I
    > doubt you'd ever see what these people are complaining about.


    The question of whether the noise matters is related to Susan's
    question, but was not the question she asked.

    The answer to Susan's question is something like this: All other
    things (sensor size and maker, for example) being equal, a 7MP
    camera is likely to have more noise than a 5MP camera. In the
    real world it isn't quite that simple. Fuji has has sensors with
    low enough noise that their engineers think they can do without image
    stabilization, for example.

    Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view,
    it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the
    image. I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise
    in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost
    never make prints and have never in my life made a print that large.
    It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more noise than
    its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what
    she wants to do with her images.

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Jul 30, 2006
    #7
  8. Susan P

    AZ Nomad Guest

    On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:21 -0700, Paul Allen <> wrote:

    >Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view,
    >it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the
    >image. I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    >to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise
    >in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost
    >never make prints and have never in my life made a print that large.
    >It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more noise than
    >its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what
    >she wants to do with her images.


    I have an olympus stylus c710 and it has an ISO setting. The picture only
    gets really noisy on the iso100 setting. IIRC, the camera will
    automatically select iso100 in low light conditions. Given enough light,
    it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without visible noise.
     
    AZ Nomad, Jul 30, 2006
    #8
  9. Susan P

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:21 -0700, Paul Allen wrote:

    > I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    > to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise
    > in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost
    > never make prints and have never in my life made a print that large.
    > It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more noise than
    > its 5MP predecessor.


    But wasn't the FZ30's 5mp predecessor also noisier than its peers
    from other manufacturers? :) People quickly learn to live with
    their camera's limitations, so it's possible than many Panasonic
    owners simply avoid taking pictures in the lower light situations
    that would result in noticeably greater amounts of noise. Amounts
    that even NeatImage might not be capable of adequately cleaning up.


    > It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what
    > she wants to do with her images.


    True, but even if she'd want to use her images in ways that ways
    that would occasionally benefit from a more noise free camera,
    cameras such as the FZ30 can provide other advantages that would
    more than make up for the greater noise levels.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 30, 2006
    #9
  10. Susan P

    Stan Beck Guest

    The noise is normally associated wit high ISO settings. If you are getting
    it at ISO 100, you are probably in very low light or are underexposing.

    --
    Stan Beck > From New Orleans to Brandon MS

    It's hard to soar with the eagles in the morning if you've been hooting with
    the owls all night.

    To reply, remove 101 from address.
    ***

    "AZ Nomad" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:21 -0700, Paul Allen
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view,
    >>it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the
    >>image. I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    >>to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise
    >>in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost
    >>never make prints and have never in my life made a print that large.
    >>It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more noise than
    >>its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what
    >>she wants to do with her images.

    >
    > I have an olympus stylus c710 and it has an ISO setting. The picture only
    > gets really noisy on the iso100 setting. IIRC, the camera will
    > automatically select iso100 in low light conditions. Given enough light,
    > it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without visible
    > noise.
     
    Stan Beck, Jul 30, 2006
    #10
  11. Susan P

    Monkee Guest

    "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > But wasn't the FZ30's 5mp predecessor also noisier than its peers
    > from other manufacturers? :) People quickly learn to live with
    > their camera's limitations, so it's possible than many Panasonic
    > owners simply avoid taking pictures in the lower light situations
    > that would result in noticeably greater amounts of noise. Amounts
    > that even NeatImage might not be capable of adequately cleaning up.


    This seems to be a topic of great debate even among owners - a popular
    opinion is that their noise reduction isn't as good as some other
    manufacturers, but as a trade off for this you actually get sharper more
    detailed images..... the 'improvement' in noise seen in the latest fz-50
    sample images seem to point to this being true as the FZ50 uses a 10MP
    sensor yet manages to look like it has less noise than the 8MP FZ-30 (but
    possibly at the expense of detail - the FZ50 images seem to have a much
    stronger watercolour effect when viewed at 100% than the FZ30)
     
    Monkee, Jul 30, 2006
    #11
  12. Susan P

    Paul Allen Guest

    On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:01:53 -0400
    ASAAR <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:21 -0700, Paul Allen wrote:
    >
    > > I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    > > to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the
    > > noise in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I
    > > almost never make prints and have never in my life made a print
    > > that large. It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit
    > > more noise than its 5MP predecessor.

    >
    > But wasn't the FZ30's 5mp predecessor also noisier than its peers
    > from other manufacturers? :)


    Dunno. I paid close attention to Panasonic from the introduction of the
    FZ10 on. I didn't start hearing any complaints about noise until people
    started getting their hands on the FZ30.

    > People quickly learn to live with
    > their camera's limitations, so it's possible than many Panasonic
    > owners simply avoid taking pictures in the lower light situations
    > that would result in noticeably greater amounts of noise. Amounts
    > that even NeatImage might not be capable of adequately cleaning up.


    That's certainly the case with me. My old Oly C700 was terrible in
    low light, mainly because of its small sensor. The FZ30 is light years
    better in many ways, but it has similar low-light characteristics.
    If I really needed good low-light performance and was willing to
    put up with the extra cost, bulk, and weight, I'd have bought a DSLR.

    > > It might be relevant to Susan, depending on what
    > > she wants to do with her images.

    >
    > True, but even if she'd want to use her images in ways that ways
    > that would occasionally benefit from a more noise free camera,
    > cameras such as the FZ30 can provide other advantages that would
    > more than make up for the greater noise levels.


    Well said. Perfection is illusive, so I settled on a camera with
    sufficient advantages that I can live with its disadvantages. It
    may turn out that buying the FZ30 just at the end of its product
    cycle was a bad move. I'm eagerly awaiting independent reviews of
    the FZ50, but will probably not be changing horses anytime soon.
    (My finance director says this camera has to hold me for a good
    long while.)

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Jul 30, 2006
    #12
  13. Susan P

    Paul Allen Guest

    On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:42:05 GMT
    AZ Nomad <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:21 -0700, Paul Allen
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view,
    > >it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the
    > >image. I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    > >to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise
    > >in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost
    > >never make prints and have never in my life made a print that
    > >large. It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more
    > >noise than its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan,
    > >depending on what she wants to do with her images.

    >
    > I have an olympus stylus c710 and it has an ISO setting. The picture
    > only gets really noisy on the iso100 setting. IIRC, the camera will
    > automatically select iso100 in low light conditions. Given enough
    > light, it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without
    > visible noise.


    Hmmm... That's interesting. Noise levels pretty universally increase
    with the ISO setting. Perhaps the C710's noise-reduction doesn't
    kick in until you boost the ISO above 100, so it appears noisier at
    the lowest setting?

    My old Oly C700 had tolerable image noise at ISO 100, and the noise
    went from tolerable to impossible as the sensitivity went up. I've
    got about 10,000 images from that camera in my archives, but I haven't
    powered it on since my FZ30 arrived. :)

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Jul 30, 2006
    #13
  14. Susan P

    AZ Nomad Guest

    On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 14:41:21 -0700, Paul Allen <> wrote:


    >On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:42:05 GMT
    >AZ Nomad <> wrote:


    >> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:21 -0700, Paul Allen
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Now, back to the question of whether the noise matters. In my view,
    >> >it only matters if it will be visible in your intended use of the
    >> >image. I see some noise in some shots from my new FZ30. If I were
    >> >to print them at 200dpi (16x12 inches), I think I would see the noise
    >> >in the prints. (But, NeatImage cleans it up very nicely.) I almost
    >> >never make prints and have never in my life made a print that
    >> >large. It is simply irrelevant to me that my camera has a bit more
    >> >noise than its 5MP predecessor. It might be relevant to Susan,
    >> >depending on what she wants to do with her images.

    >>
    >> I have an olympus stylus c710 and it has an ISO setting. The picture
    >> only gets really noisy on the iso100 setting. IIRC, the camera will
    >> automatically select iso100 in low light conditions. Given enough
    >> light, it'll use a higher iso setting and generate pictures without
    >> visible noise.


    >Hmmm... That's interesting. Noise levels pretty universally increase
    >with the ISO setting. Perhaps the C710's noise-reduction doesn't
    >kick in until you boost the ISO above 100, so it appears noisier at
    >the lowest setting?


    I just shot some test shots and I had it exactly wrong. The higher the iso,
    the more the noise. But back to what I was attempting to say: the noise on
    it's 7MP sensor is only a problem at some iso settings (higher).
     
    AZ Nomad, Jul 30, 2006
    #14
  15. In article <Xns98107746B470DD5E712@127.0.0.1>,
    Susan P <> wrote:

    > Someone here said that 7 MP cameras are likely to have more noise in the
    > picture than a 5MP camera.
    >
    > That was a while ago just as 7MP cameras were appearing on the lower
    > mid-range cameras.
    >
    > Is this still true or have manufacturers started to compromise on the
    > quality of their 5MP cameras such that 7MP is definitely less noisy and
    > better now.
    >
    > I think I would like to get a 5MP low to mid range camera (smaller
    > storage size for picture too) but I don't want to go against the trend
    > in the marketplace because I will probably find there is now nothing
    > being marketed for my sort of needs!
    >
    > I do not expect to print anything larger than an 8 x 10 and that would
    > be exceptional.


    It depends on the sensor design more than anything else. Regardless of
    megapixels, you'll find sensors that produce anywhere from 7 to 10 bits
    of clean data.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Jul 31, 2006
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    Mid-range money - 6600 DDR2 v X1300 at bit-tech

    Silverstrand, Dec 7, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    667
    Silverstrand
    Dec 7, 2005
  2. Simon

    Choosing a mid range digital camera

    Simon, Mar 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    651
    Patco
    Mar 5, 2004
  3. Stephen Poley

    Recommendations wanted: mid-range camera

    Stephen Poley, Sep 14, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    322
    Stephen Poley
    Sep 15, 2004
  4. Ed
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    556
  5. Ian

    Mid-Range CPU Guide

    Ian, Oct 3, 2007, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    691
Loading...

Share This Page