When photo noise annoys
This comparison shows the effects of image noise and aggressive noise reduction technology. Both images were taken at a high-sensitivity ISO 800 setting using the 10-megapixel Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50. The top image shows the camera's own processed image, and the bottom shows the "raw" image from the sensor without in-camera processing. The top image has smoother colours and fewer speckles, but colours tend to look blotchy (as in the large "Melinda's" logo) or lose detail (as in the foliage beneath the logo).
Although the original noise and the noise reduction artifacts aren't apparent when shooting at the more ordinary ISO 100, it can be difficult to deal with jiggling cameras and moving subjects in low-light conditions. Digital SLR cameras, whose larger image sensors come with larger pixels that gather more light, are better able to handle high-ISO conditions.
Do consumers care?
Having better technology and getting consumers to buy aren't the same thing. Fujifilm, for example, has technology that uses two sensors for each pixel -- one for low-light sensitivity and one for brighter conditions.
"Those ... cameras did a fantastic job with highlight detail," Chris Crotty, an analyst with iSuppli. "It was an admirable effort, but it really didn't get any traction in the marketplace."
But there's evidence of a more sophisticated understanding of the situation -- in part the result of the fact that most digital-camera buyers aren't buying their first digital cameras. Among features camera makers are beginning to add to point-and-shoot models are face detection to set focus and exposure better, lenses that gather more light, and zoom lenses that work better with wide-angle views.
"Megapixels will always be important, but as consumers become more educated, it will be the addition of other features that make the purchase of their new camera more worthwhile," said Richard Campbell, vice president of imaging for Panasonic Consumer Electronics. "As the digital-camera market matures, consumers are becoming aware that lens quality, processor quality and image stabilisation technologies are at least as important as pixel counts when determining image quality."
Even better, those features aren't mere marketing hype. "Face detection is a technology that has real tangible benefits to consumers," Etchells said. "You will get more in-focus photos and get the exposure right."
Don't expect an end to the megapixel race, though, Crotty said. The firm estimates that digital cameras had an average of 5.7 megapixels in 2006 and forecasts it will increase to 6.5 megapixels this year and to 9.2 megapixels in 2010.
SmugMug's MacAskill thinks that's a shame.
"We went past the point where more megapixels made a difference years ago," MacAskill said. "In the last 3 million prints we've made for very discriminating eyes, none were returned for lack of pixels."
Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!
adslnerd@bigpond.net.au
06/07/2007 01:13 PM
I use a Sony DSC-N1 8.1 megapixel digital camera which uses a Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar lens and has a 3" touch screen LCD and Made in Japan. The image quality from this camer is amazing, from 640x480 all the way up to HD resolution photographs and the clarity has to be seen to be believed. I found no artifacts or noise issue, and I believe this is partly because of the high quality lens and Sony's proprietary processing engine. You can even add MP3 sounds to the pictures in a slideshow. I would only every buy Sony digital cameras as i prefer mine Made in Japan. The N1 has been replaced by the N2 which is now 10.1 megapixels and the metal body colour has been changed from silver to a copper colour.
Report offensive content