megapixels <---> zoom

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jim, Oct 17, 2003.

  1. Jim

    Jim Guest

    I'm just interested in knowing how to value zoomfactors / megapixels ;

    For example, I'm reading about the specs for a new Panasonic Lumix
    camera. It's a 4 megapixel camera with 12x optical zoom.
    When taking a snap with maximum zoom, how many megapixels would I need
    (without zoom) to reach the same resolution level? (on a cutout from
    the higher megapixel cameras image)

    I know it also depends on optics quality, CCD etc. But just roughly?

    Thanks folks,
    Jim
     
    Jim, Oct 17, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Duh, 12 times, so 48 megapixels. This a trick question?

    Tim.
     
    Timothy Lange, Oct 17, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jim

    marbles Guest

    (Top-posting corrected.)

    Duh, yourself, Einstein.

    Maybe he was thinking it was geometric or exponential.

    For example, if a 2x zoom resulted in a doubling of
    the linear edge dimensions, that would mean 4x the
    pixel count, right?

    So a 12x zoom, with 12 times the linear dimensions,
    would mean 144 times the original 4MP, or 576MP
    would be required.

    Your computations are based upon "2x" meaning
    not twice the image linear dimension but twice the
    diagonal measurement, right? This means the linear
    dimensions increase by a factor of 2^-2 or 1.44,
    right?

    But I'm sure you knew that. Otherwise, you
    wouldn't have been so condescending.
     
    marbles, Oct 17, 2003
    #3
  4. Jim

    Ol' Bab Guest

    Double duh. It's 12 squared, or 576 Mp. Assuming this super camera's
    fl-to-chip-width ratio is the same as the zoom at it's widest setting.
    Ol' Bab
     
    Ol' Bab, Oct 17, 2003
    #4
  5. Jim

    marbles Guest

    Must be a Boilermaker.
     
    marbles, Oct 17, 2003
    #5
  6. Jim

    Jerome Bigge Guest

    I find a good "rule of thumb" is that you need about one
    megapixel per "x" of digital zoom. Thus a two megapixel
    would support 2x, a 3 megapixel 3x, and so forth. So you'd
    need a 48 megapixel camera to equal your 4 megapixel
    camera with its 12x zoom. This is assuming that optical
    quality of the lens was up to the job... This was "doable"
    with film before digital came on the scene. Shoot a scene
    with Kodachrome 25 or other ultra fine grain film, and enlarge
    the picture just as far as grain and optical quality would allow.
    Also was an excellent way to determine actual lens quality.
    Today you can do the same with a good slide scanner.

    The sharpest 35mm camera lenses were usually the
    50mm focal lengths working at about F8. You can get
    a real debate going whether or not the Nikkor 50 F1.8
    was sharper than the Canon 50mm F1.8, etc. My own
    experience indicates that there was enough sample
    to sample variation that "luck" was the determining
    factor... Spent about 14 years all together in the
    photo industry.

    Jerome Bigge
    Member, Muskegon Astronomical Society
    Author of the "Warlady" & "Wartime" series.
    Download at "http://members.tripod.com/~jbigge"
     
    Jerome Bigge, Oct 18, 2003
    #6
  7. Jim

    Nimous Guest

    What u tells about the 50mm lenses is what i'vr learned aslo.

    About megapixels/zoom.......wouldn't u need more mepapixel pr "x" for each
    "x" u go?
     
    Nimous, Oct 18, 2003
    #7
  8. He was wrong, but so are you!
    So far so good.
    Diagonal measurement is a linear measurement, just like height and
    width. If you double the diagonal, you double the width and height at
    the same time - you do not multiply by sqrt(2). By the way, 1.44 isn't
    sqrt(2) either.

    Dave
     
    Dave Martindale, Oct 19, 2003
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.