When 2 megapixels is better than 5 - iPhone 3G

Spin This! · 05-20-2007, 10:44 PM

I'm glad Apple didn't go more than 2 megapixels on the iPhone because more would have just crippled it. There's a lot of disinformation on this subject so I hope this post is informative...

The reason most cell phone cameras are so crappy is the quality of glass (lens) and the actual size of the image sensor, not how many megapixels it has.

Here's why:

* When you have a small lens, that translates into less light entering the sensor. Since size is a primary concern for most, makers will skimp anyway they can. That means smaller, plastic lenses but the end result is the quality of the on-board camera suffers.

* The size of the sensor itself is a concern. Bigger sensors mean the chip manufacturer can make the light collectors in the sensor bigger (meaning they will collect more light) if they don't add more megapixels. However, most manufacturers opt for bigger megapixel count (and thus smaller light collectors) because of the "megapixel myth". This is the primary reason why digital SLR cameras are a lot better than smaller point-and-shoot cameras in low light and why you'll see a lot of point and shoot cameras start at ISO 50 and get grainy after ISO 200.

The problem is everyone wants more and more megapixels in a smaller and smaller device but they want to be able to defy the laws of physics to do it.

ebrunn · 05-20-2007, 10:47 PM

True that. If people really want that good of a camera, they should go buy a SLR or something

wjp09 · 05-20-2007, 10:47 PM

Thanks for the explination^ Im perfectly happy with 2mp. I only take pictures on my cellphone for 'random spur of the moment things' If im going to a sporting event Ill take my camera (7.2 mp) and take quality pictures.

robhon · 05-20-2007, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spin This!

I'm glad Apple didn't go more than 2 megapixels on the iPhone because more would have just crippled it. There's a lot of disinformation on this subject so I hope this post is informative...

The reason most cell phone cameras are so crappy is the quality of glass (lens) and the actual size of the image sensor, not how many megapixels it has.

Here's why:

* When you have a small lens, that translates into less light entering the sensor. Since size is a primary concern for most, makers will skimp anyway they can. That means smaller, plastic lenses but the end result is the quality of the on-board camera suffers.

* The size of the sensor itself is a concern. Bigger sensors mean the chip manufacturer can make the light collectors in the sensor bigger (meaning they will collect more light) if they don't add more megapixels. However, most manufacturers opt for bigger megapixel count (and thus smaller light collectors) because of the "megapixel myth". This is the primary reason why digital SLR cameras are a lot better than smaller point-and-shoot cameras in low light and why you'll see a lot of point and shoot cameras start at ISO 50 and get grainy after ISO 200.

The problem is everyone wants more and more megapixels in a smaller and smaller device but they want to be able to defy the laws of physics to do it.

From the pics I've seen it looks like the actual lens on the iPhone camera is fairly small. You think that's going to have a significant effect on the overall picture quality?

itsabouttime · 05-21-2007, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spin This!

I'm glad Apple didn't go more than 2 megapixels on the iPhone because more would have just crippled it. There's a lot of disinformation on this subject so I hope this post is informative...

The reason most cell phone cameras are so crappy is the quality of glass (lens) and the actual size of the image sensor, not how many megapixels it has.

Here's why:

* When you have a small lens, that translates into less light entering the sensor. Since size is a primary concern for most, makers will skimp anyway they can. That means smaller, plastic lenses but the end result is the quality of the on-board camera suffers.

* The size of the sensor itself is a concern. Bigger sensors mean the chip manufacturer can make the light collectors in the sensor bigger (meaning they will collect more light) if they don't add more megapixels. However, most manufacturers opt for bigger megapixel count (and thus smaller light collectors) because of the "megapixel myth". This is the primary reason why digital SLR cameras are a lot better than smaller point-and-shoot cameras in low light and why you'll see a lot of point and shoot cameras start at ISO 50 and get grainy after ISO 200.

The problem is everyone wants more and more megapixels in a smaller and smaller device but they want to be able to defy the laws of physics to do it.

Thank you, I wasn't aware of this.

ColsTiger · 05-21-2007, 01:33 AM

Thanks for the lesson. This has been discussed many times here, but never in this much detail. 2.0MP is looking better and better.

Spin This! · 05-21-2007, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robhon

From the pics I've seen it looks like the actual lens on the iPhone camera is fairly small. You think that's going to have a significant effect on the overall picture quality?

Hard to judge at this point... it's going to limit its ability to shoot in low light, that's for sure (especially since most cellphones don't have flashes either).

It looks very similar to the iSight built into the latest crop of MacBooks/MacBook Pros, but those are only 640 x 480. I don't have an iSight so I can't comment on quality but they're been known to be relatively decent.

I know Apple did quite a bit of work on the software for the iSight to get the picture quality as good as it can get so hopefully some of that image processing will trickle down (and over) to the iPhone.

That said, those alleged photos floating around look pretty good to me, especially considering how small the lens in the iPhone actually is—much better than a lot of others.

Napoleon Dynamite · 05-21-2007, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spin This!

I'm glad Apple didn't go more than 2 megapixels on the iPhone because more would have just crippled it. There's a lot of disinformation on this subject so I hope this post is informative...

The reason most cell phone cameras are so crappy is the quality of glass (lens) and the actual size of the image sensor, not how many megapixels it has.

Here's why:

* When you have a small lens, that translates into less light entering the sensor. Since size is a primary concern for most, makers will skimp anyway they can. That means smaller, plastic lenses but the end result is the quality of the on-board camera suffers.

* The size of the sensor itself is a concern. Bigger sensors mean the chip manufacturer can make the light collectors in the sensor bigger (meaning they will collect more light) if they don't add more megapixels. However, most manufacturers opt for bigger megapixel count (and thus smaller light collectors) because of the "megapixel myth". This is the primary reason why digital SLR cameras are a lot better than smaller point-and-shoot cameras in low light and why you'll see a lot of point and shoot cameras start at ISO 50 and get grainy after ISO 200.

The problem is everyone wants more and more megapixels in a smaller and smaller device but they want to be able to defy the laws of physics to do it.

Remain Nameless · 05-21-2007, 08:16 PM

We're not buying the iPhone for it's amazing photo-taking abilities, it's just the icing on the cake!

I have less than one megapixel photo abilities on my current phone and that's fine for me (after all, if I'm serious about taking photos, i use this cool device called a CAMERA... not a phone.).

2 megapixels is great in general and fits the iPhone nicely.

boxta · 05-21-2007, 09:23 PM

it is really the quality of the glass and the quality of sensor that matters the most,....

Frankly.. 2 megapixel means you can have a picture about 1600*1250... which is frankly... more than enough for web viewing on most cases.... and plenty for a 4*6 print ... (still get more than 250dpi, which is enough for printing)

so I am not sure what's the big deal.. the point about sensor size being fixed, and squeezing more pixels in it would degrade image quality is totally valid.

The whole reason why SLR produce much cleaner picture, with lower noise at higher ISO is mainly attributed to the sensor size being much bigger than compact cameras. I have a 10megapixel Canon SLR, and I can tell you even 10mp on a SLR size sensor is starting to push it. You will find the 8.2mp Canon 30D produce a slightly cleaner image than the 10mp Rebel. Even though 10mp would retain a little more detail when you print it.

Frankly, I don't think the size of the glass matters as much.. (quality of glass and sensor size matters more). For example, a 70-200 L glass from canon is 67mm while a shorter L glass is 77mm. Does that mean the 70-200L has worse quality because it's smaller?? of course not. It is really a variable in the design of the glass, but a good quality small glass would produce much better pic than a bad quality large glass...

just wanna share my 2cents as i am quite a serious photography hobbyist.

Introducing Everything iCafe Social