End the Megapixel War Now!

The “Megapixel War” blog post that follows was originally written in 2009.  You read that correctly … 2009!  Yet, it still holds true today. I still don’t look for the highest pixel count when I purchase a camera. It still comes down to picture quality. That equates to pixel sharpness, color accuracy and dynamic range for me.

Enough is enough!

Digitalrev.com hit the nail on the head when they stated: “The Megapixels War has been raging on since digital cameras first hit the market.” It seems that everyone has fallen into the trap that “more pixels = better camera“. I hate to be the one to break the news, but the more pixels argument simply isn’t entirely true. While we have become more adept at cramming smaller pixels on to tiny sensors, there are definite trade offs.

The Canon 40D and 50D comparison is a good case in study since the 40D is a 10MP camera while the 50D has 15MP, in otherwise similar bodies. I have used the 50D for quite some time now and, upon detailed inspection at a pixel level, there’s no denying the raw images it produces are softer than those produced by the 40D. This is to be expected in a camera that bumps the resolution up 50% on the same-sized sensor simply because there is less wiggle room. However, it is capable of capturing slightly more detail.

The same is true for compact point-and-shoot consumer cameras. However, the sensor size in these cameras are tiny when compared to a pro-level DSLR.   Packing more pixels on a smaller sensor increases the heat generated thereby increasing the amount of noise in the final image. This is one of the key reasons why the image sharpness captured by a consumer camera is no where close to the sharpness captured by a professional camera, even when compared to one that’s almost two years old like the Canon 40D.

The other major downside to more megapixels is that the quality of the camera’s optics become paramount to the quality of the final product.  It is essential to use top quality optics with camera bodies capable of capturing high pixel counts if you want to take advantage of the higher levels of detail the body is capable of capturing. Images captured with lenses, that were considered “decent” on other bodies, may appear fuzzy since the optics are not capable of focusing as sharply as needed. If the lens provides a less-than-perfect image to the sensor, the 15MP sensor will definitely capture a magnified blurry image. So, are you really gaining anything when you need to spend $2000 on a lens?!

At this point, a consumer level camera gains very little by increasing the megapixel count due to the tiny sensor size. If picture quality is your number one priority, you may actually be better off with a camera that had fewer megapixels. Let me put it this way … most standard sized prints done in a professional photo lab are printed at 300dpi. If you wanted to print an 8×10, you would only need an image that’s 2400×3000 pixels. Some quick math will show you that a camera with ~6MP can capture the necessary image.  For example, 13″x19″ limited-edition prints of Joe Holme’s “American Musuem of Natural History” series were selling at the Jen Bekman Gallery in Manhattan for $650 each at one point.  What camera did he use?  A 6MP Nikon D70.

Cramming two to three times as many pixels on the sensor may not doing you any favors.  You may only be ending up with bloated file sizes as a result