Why a 16MP camera is better than 12MP

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

I think the point might be that a better camera, even with less MP, is going to take better photos than a worse camera with higher MP. LG is known for heavy handed artificial sharpening of their photos, so I think that might be more of what you are looking at when you think you're seeing in terms of "clarity".

 

[Mike Dee]

At least it's recognizable, readable, and sharper.

Not once you bring in the noise.

 

[Almeuit]

I crop my head from group pictures all the time. The further away, the more pixelated it'll be. I don't want to upload my head on here. I'm pretty sure you guys crop your head from photos all the time. Some people don't like taking selfies but use cropped shots instead.

You said you take tons of photos of nature and yet .. you can't produce one to show your "cropping" -- interesting. Very interesting.

 

[Almeuit]

At least it's recognizable, readable, and sharper.

I can recognize, read, and have no issues telling what it is from either one. They also both look like crap.

I still don't see your advantage. You have yet to post one thing to prove your point. You say you can't read the 12 MP one but can on the 16 MP for your "examples" yet .. I can read both. I am confused.

 

[LeoRex]

it matters because I take outdoor photos of trees and such so the details matter.

They do, but even then, there are often more important characteristics... Here is a shot from the 16mp V30

Same shot a second or two later from a 12mp Pixel XL

Ad hoc... I zoomed in on my phone and the V30 had a little more zoom left.

The full pics on both... You have to zoom in to look at pixel differences to see any detail difference, they are near the same. But the XLs shot has better texture, dynamic range, etc.

 

[Mike Dee]

They do, but even then, there are often more important characteristics... Here is a shot from the 16mp V30
//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180221/d1b6b3728d83b06bb8b279df1f43f213.jpg

Same shot a second or two later from a 12mp Pixel XL

//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180221/7f4e068e10dcc7def57aef954d2fe3c6.jpg

Ad hoc... I zoomed in on my phone and the V30 had a little more zoom left.

The full pics on both... You have to zoom in to look at pixel differences to see any detail difference, they are near the same. But the XLs shot has better texture, dynamic range, etc.

Tremendous difference

 

[flyingkytez]

They do, but even then, there are often more important characteristics... Here is a shot from the 16mp V30
//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180221/d1b6b3728d83b06bb8b279df1f43f213.jpg

Same shot a second or two later from a 12mp Pixel XL

//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180221/7f4e068e10dcc7def57aef954d2fe3c6.jpg

Ad hoc... I zoomed in on my phone and the V30 had a little more zoom left.

The full pics on both... You have to zoom in to look at pixel differences to see any detail difference, they are near the same. But the XLs shot has better texture, dynamic range, etc.

I understand that and have said many times the V20 and V30 does not take overall better pictures than say the Pixel 2 or S8/Note 8. What I'm trying to say is when you take a photo of an object far away, the 16MP has higher resolution capacity and can capture sharper images when zooming/cropping.. perfect examples are texts and words. I usually crop heads and faces from group photos. That's 1 reason why it's better, but I'm sure there are many reasons why it isn't. I think LG purposely chose the 16MP because they wanted to capture higher resolution photos and videos when zooming.

You're looking at 4032 x 3024 (12MP) image versus 3492 x 4656 (16MP)... The 16MP can fit more tiny pixels in the photo and therefore look better when you crop a part of the image. Of course it doesn't mean the overall photo is better.

 

[flyingkytez]

Shot on V20

















If you shot this same photo with a 12MP camera phone at this distance, you'll probably won't be able to recognize the text on the clock. Again great for nature or outdoor photography when you DON'T have a telephoto zooming device with you. You can capture small text from far away and the camera will actually capture it. I have 12MP shots from my Galaxy S7 and looking at the cropped faces, they look pixelated and ugly...

 

[Mike Dee]

Must be me...I have no idea what you are trying to convey or how you are making your point using these samples.

All I know is that the 16 megapixel sensor that LG is using pales compared to most other 12 megapixel sensors. It doesn't matter how you crop it when it's garbage to begin with. All you get is higher resolution garbage. That's not what I want in my photos.

 

[Almeuit]

Shot on V20

View attachment 279501



View attachment 279502



View attachment 279503



View attachment 279504



If you shot this same photo with a 12MP camera phone at this distance, you'll probably won't be able to recognize the text on the clock. Again great for nature or outdoor photography when you DON'T have a telephoto zooming device with you. You can capture small text from far away and the camera will actually capture it. I have 12MP shots from my Galaxy S7 and looking at the cropped faces, they look pixelated and ugly...

So why the "If you shot this same" -- You just said in the same post you have evidence. Why no evidence of the side by side? Is it because it was like your last defense where they both were completely readable and both had horrid quality like this same example?

I assume yes.

 

[flyingkytez]

So why the "If you shot this same" -- You just said in the same post you have evidence. Why no evidence of the side by side? Is it because it was like your last defense where they both were completely readable and both had horrid quality like this same example?

I assume yes.

Again, I do not have the phone to test it anymore, however I am looking through old photos. I recall being disappointed with the S7's 12MP because of the lower resolution. Here is a photo of the baseball field again, but this time I'm standing much closer and still the text is much more blurry. That's the point, the sharpness goes down and details are lost when you zoom in or look closely.














Not really a good comparison of the other one because I'm standing closer and at a different angle.

 

[Almeuit]

Again, I do not have the phone to test it anymore, however I am looking through old photos. I recall being disappointed with the S7's 12MP because of the lower resolution. Here is a photo of the baseball field again, but this time I'm standing much closer and still the text is much more blurry. That's the point, the sharpness goes down and details are lost when you zoom in or look closely.



View attachment 279508


View attachment 279509


View attachment 279510


View attachment 279511

Not really a good comparison of the other one because I'm standing closer and at a different angle.

I can still read it (from both examples) -- both are still absolute awful quality once zoomed in / cropped.

 

[LeoRex]

Well, my wife had a S7 for a long time, and hated the camera pretty much the entire time. I have tons of comparison shots with the S7 and S7E and my 6P and Samsung chewed up photos... I don't think they managed to handle the dual pixel sensor properly... Remember that each pixel is actual to photo diodes that team up when it's picture taking time... You can almost view it as a oversampled 24mp camera with 0.7 micron pixels.

Now, the pixel 2 utilizes the same sensor family, but they also have the luxury of having, by a wide margin, the best photo processing system going... The V30 took much better pictures with the Google camera than LG's... They still weren't on par... But it goes to show that hardware is almost inconsequential when it comes to mobile photography at this point.

 

[Itsa_Me_Mario]

But it goes to show that hardware is almost inconsequential when it comes to mobile photography at this point.

This is the most amazing thing about this discussion. Google has taken the conversion from microns and megapixels to almost entirely being about software. Obviously their software is meant to work with their hardware, so applying it on a different device isn't going to yield the same results... but it's amazing how much better it actually is despite that obstacle. Until phones are able to house hardware that can legitimately challenge traditional photography on its own terms, software is going to rule mobile photography. The main takeaway? Screw the spec sheet, and possibly even screw the number of lenses... look at who is writing the software and what kind of results they are getting.

 

[MA2GA28]

Again, I do not have the phone to test it anymore, however I am looking through old photos. I recall being disappointed with the S7's 12MP because of the lower resolution. Here is a photo of the baseball field again, but this time I'm standing much closer and still the text is much more blurry. That's the point, the sharpness goes down and details are lost when you zoom in or look closely.



View attachment 279508


View attachment 279509


View attachment 279510


View attachment 279511

Not really a good comparison of the other one because I'm standing closer and at a different angle.

I think the problem is that you're having trouble showing us what's wrong with your examples, because you can't recreate the issue you adamantly believe exists. The clock name could be different due to pixels, but it could also be lighting and the angle too. Regardless, both can be read pretty easily and both are not good quality.

Unless you're trying to read a fortune from a fortune cookie glued to a wall across a warehouse, the evidence shows that your "point" doesn't really exist.

 

[chanchan05]

Honestly from the pictures presented as 'evidence' while both are horrible quality, they can still be read, and that's the point for me. Doesn't matter if one is a bit sharper, because you're not using it as a telescope. If I take a picture of something, I don't take it with the intention of cropping it later. This is a camera with digital zoom.

So overall I'd still pick the 12mp because the difference I can see is inconsequential.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

This is the most amazing thing about this discussion. Google has taken the conversion from microns and megapixels to almost entirely being about software. Obviously their software is meant to work with their hardware, so applying it on a different device isn't going to yield the same results... but it's amazing how much better it actually is despite that obstacle. Until phones are able to house hardware that can legitimately challenge traditional photography on its own terms, software is going to rule mobile photography. The main takeaway? Screw the spec sheet, and possibly even screw the number of lenses... look at who is writing the software and what kind of results they are getting.

It actually does pretty well with equivalent hardware.

The camera on the flagship Samsungs of 2017, the U11 and other ones with 1/2.6" 1.4 micron 12.2MP sensors like the IMX362 (also used on the Pixel 2) get pretty close with the HDR+ port.

It's not a 1:1 exact copy but it's close.

 

[Almeuit]

I think the problem is that you're having trouble showing us what's wrong with your examples, because you can't recreate the issue you adamantly believe exists. The clock name could be different due to pixels, but it could also be lighting and the angle too. Regardless, both can be read pretty easily and both are not good quality.

Unless you're trying to read a fortune from a fortune cookie glued to a wall across a warehouse, the evidence shows that your "point" doesn't really exist.

This ... 110% this.

 

[flyingkytez]

I think the problem is that you're having trouble showing us what's wrong with your examples, because you can't recreate the issue you adamantly believe exists. The clock name could be different due to pixels, but it could also be lighting and the angle too. Regardless, both can be read pretty easily and both are not good quality.

Unless you're trying to read a fortune from a fortune cookie glued to a wall across a warehouse, the evidence shows that your "point" doesn't really exist.

Smaller resolution photo from 12MP cameras = reduced quality when zooming in bc smaller pixels on the photo... the tiny pixels make up the photos, each tiny dot. There is a significant difference in resolution size between 16MP and 12MP, especially when viewing on a large screen like TV or projector. Everyone praised the S7 and Note 7 camera but I honestly thought it was weak for these reasons.

I'll try to get a S7 or S8 to compare.

 

[flyingkytez]

It actually does pretty well with equivalent hardware.

The camera on the flagship Samsungs of 2017, the U11 and other ones with 1/2.6" 1.4 micron 12.2MP sensors like the IMX362 (also used on the Pixel 2) get pretty close with the HDR+ port.

It's not a 1:1 exact copy but it's close.

Tiny dots make up an entire photo. Less tiny dots on a 12MP photo. Objects from far away will have less dots, therefore the object will not be clear enough to see when zoomed in. Explain why a switch to 8MP or even 10MP from a 12MP would create a significant outcry.. because the resolution will be very small and images will not look good.