Why a 16MP camera is better than 12MP

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

My mistake. I had checked several articles before posting that, and they all were saying 1/2.6". I just found it on LG's site and you are correct, so someone put out the wrong info somewhere along the line.

No worries.

Just kinda boggles my mind how they went even smaller still with the V30.

 

[Mooncatt]

No worries.

Just kinda boggles my mind how they went even smaller still with the V30.

True. I still love it for the manual controls.

Now if they would just come out with a phone with a larger sensor, a bulb mode for extra long exposures, and an optical telephoto secondary camera, I might just give up my V20 and all it has (removable battery, IR blaster, metal body, LCD, etc) for it. Might...

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

True. I still love it for the manual controls.

Now if they would just come out with a phone with a larger sensor, a bulb mode for extra long exposures, and an optical telephoto secondary camera, I might just give up my V20 and all it has (removable battery, IR blaster, metal body, LCD, etc) for it. Might...

One can dream...

 

[flyingkytez]

Why don't we just agree that picture quality is in the eye of the beholder.
Some people like their pictures sharp enough to cut, never mind some loss in detail and lighting, as long as they can zoom in and count somebody's nose hairs.
Some people like their photos to capture as much light play detail that they can tell who's shirt wasn't ironed that morning.

Take a picture of a text from a distance. Then zoom in. When cropped/zoomed in you'll see it.

 

[flyingkytez]

I did. Multiple times.

They came out sharp enough to have the plate be legible.

Also, 12MP is plenty for a decently sized poster. Unless you're framing art on a mega huge canvas, 12MP is ample for a standard print photo.

I will just say this. Photography enthusiasts are probably going to laugh at anyone who says megapixels matter more than anything else.

Why is everyone complaining about the V20's 8MP wide angle? It's because the resolution is too low. Therefore, pixels do matter. LG upgraded it to 13MP.

 

[chanchan05]

Take a picture of a text from a distance. Then zoom in. When cropped/zoomed in you'll see it.

Again, I already did. I posted a picture of text from a distance already and I can still read it.

It's not our fault you want to use your phone as a telescope.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

Why is everyone complaining about the V20's 8MP wide angle? It's because the resolution is too low. Therefore, pixels do matter. LG upgraded it to 13MP.

It’s a wide-angle camera...

Why are you even cropping on a camera with a shallow focal-length?

The main reason the secondary camera was panned wasn’t the lower resolution. It’s the smaller aperture tied with a smaller sensor and pixel combo which caused the performance in low-light to suffer drastically.

 

[Aquila]

It’s a wide-angle camera...

Why are you even cropping on a camera with a shallow focal-length?

The main reason the secondary camera was panned wasn’t the lower resolution. It’s the smaller aperture tied with a smaller sensor and pixel combo which caused the performance in low-light to suffer drastically.

Better question... Why are we taking bad pictures and then cropping them all anways... ? The vast majority of real cropping scenarios are actually taking a 4:3 photo and cutting it down to a 3:3 - but that's removing 25% height, not treating crop as a way to zoom in on subjects that were barely captured by a poor photo taken by a poor photographer.

Additionally, how many times does it need to be explained how the limits on smartphone camera technology are not being driven by MP? There's never been a counter argument to the explanations, merely a repetition of the original false statement for which those explanations cost to counter themselves. The OP has not given one single point of evidence nor provided any valid observation to which any logical debate could follow. Here's our conversation so far:

OP: more MP is better
All: actually that's incorrect, here is why
OP: more MP is better
All: well, since you didn't read a word of the last posts we tried to help you with, here's a more detailed explanation
OP: but more MP is better
All: No. Here, try looking at it this way...
OP: but more MP is better and especially better than less MP
All: wtf... Ok one last try...
OP: More MP is better

Let me know if anyone doesn't see the pattern...

 

[Mooncatt]

Additionally, how many times does it need to be explained how the limits on smartphone camera technology are not being driven by MP?

If this doesn't do it, nothing will. Lol

https://www.dxomark.com/disruptive-technologies-mobile-imaging-taking-smartphone-cameras-next-level/

 

[LeoRex]

Take a picture of a text from a distance. Then zoom in. When cropped/zoomed in you'll see it.

Since when did zooming in on text become the end-all for determining quality? A V30 or V20 might be able to yeild sharper text when zooming in, but a phone like the Pixel 2 gives superior results in pretty much every other category.

Besides, that sharp text you are hanging your hat on is as much a function of the heavy sharpening LG is doing than the resolution... The same over-processing that LG takes a ton of criticism.

 

[flyingkytez]

Since when did zooming in on text become the end-all for determining quality? A V30 or V20 might be able to yeild sharper text when zooming in, but a phone like the Pixel 2 gives superior results in pretty much every other category.

Besides, that sharp text you are hanging your hat on is as much a function of the heavy sharpening LG is doing than the resolution... The same over-processing that LG takes a ton of criticism.

I was at a business meeting.. there were notes written on the white board.. I had an idea of using my phones to zoom in with the camera to see it better.. the Galaxy S8+ with the 12MP camera couldn't make up the texts on the board due to lower resolution. The V20 in the other hand was able to see the text thanks to the higher res 16MP.

I'm in no way claiming that 16MP = better picture quality, it does not. But blown up pictures.. there will be lost of detail.. for the average person it doesn't matter at all. For me however, I take outdoor photos so things from far away will not be visible with a 12MP.

 

[flyingkytez]

Better question... Why are we taking bad pictures and then cropping them all anways... ? The vast majority of real cropping scenarios are actually taking a 4:3 photo and cutting it down to a 3:3 - but that's removing 25% height, not treating crop as a way to zoom in on subjects that were barely captured by a poor photo taken by a poor photographer.

Additionally, how many times does it need to be explained how the limits on smartphone camera technology are not being driven by MP? There's never been a counter argument to the explanations, merely a repetition of the original false statement for which those explanations cost to counter themselves. The OP has not given one single point of evidence nor provided any valid observation to which any logical debate could follow. Here's our conversation so far:

OP: more MP is better
All: actually that's incorrect, here is why
OP: more MP is better
All: well, since you didn't read a word of the last posts we tried to help you with, here's a more detailed explanation
OP: but more MP is better
All: No. Here, try looking at it this way...
OP: but more MP is better and especially better than less MP
All: wtf... Ok one last try...
OP: More MP is better

Let me know if anyone doesn't see the pattern...

Example: I was at a meeting, notes were written on the white board. I was in the back of the room so it was hard to read. I had the idea of using a smartphone to zoom in with the camera to see better. The Galaxy S8+ was NOT able to make up the text when zoomed in.. my V20 was able to show the notes on the whiteboard. Conclusion is the higher MP will show more detail, especially when zooming or cropping a distant object. It matters to me because I take outdoor photos of nature.. details matter. It doesn't mean the camera is better, the S8+ takes overall better pictures.

BTW I uploaded comparison example photos but everyone thought I was lying.

 

[flyingkytez]

Why don't we just agree that picture quality is in the eye of the beholder.
Some people like their pictures sharp enough to cut, never mind some loss in detail and lighting, as long as they can zoom in and count somebody's nose hairs.
Some people like their photos to capture as much light play detail that they can tell who's shirt wasn't ironed that morning.

I don't like the 12MP trend.. increase it back to 16MP.. I'm making a point that it matters to me at least. Would hate to see LG put a 12MP on their next phone... quality would be reduced.. why does the 5MP front camera suck? Resolution too low so it's grainy.. same goes with the 8MP wide angle lens on the V20.. too low resolution otherwise pretty good wide angle camera..

 

[chanchan05]

Because as I said, the problem is you intend to use your phone as a telescope of sorts. And it seems like a niche want from you, something that the manufacturers really don't consider as a wide use for their phones. They're willing to sacrifice the zoom for overall better photo.

Oh yeah, do you know that the 12mp on the Moto Z will have better pictured when zoomed in than the V20 can ever dream of? Because it has 10x optical zoom. The digital zoom on the v20 can only dream of matching that.

With that said, for your specific use, just get a phone with optical zoom or the Sony phones since they use 20 megapixel sensors.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

I don't like the 12MP trend.. increase it back to 16MP.. I'm making a point that it matters to me at least. Would hate to see LG put a 12MP on their next phone... quality would be reduced.. why does the 5MP front camera suck? Resolution too low so it's grainy.. same goes with the 8MP wide angle lens on the V20.. too low resolution otherwise pretty good wide angle camera..

Like I said, 16MP would be great if everything else was adjusted to compensate for the increased resolution. 16MP while retaining the same pixel size amongst other upgrades is an upgrade, but megapixel count has never been a sore point for phones over the past few years as very few people utilize a crop zoom.

With that said, for your specific use, just get a phone with optical zoom or the Sony phones since they use 20 megapixel sensors.

Sony phones up until recently were a prime example of why more MP =/= better camera.

The hardware is phenomenal, and not because of the MP count. It's just that post-Lollipop, the software processing has taken a huge downturn, turning a ton of things into an oversharpened, watercolor mess

 

[Aquila]

MP isn't even the largest determining factor in zoom quality. This whole thing is just a basic misunderstanding of the way photography works in smartphones. The link shared earlier by @Mooncatt has a great explanation.

 

[L0n3N1nja]

16mp vs 12mp all other things the same, 16mp would be better.

However comparing the V20 16mp to say a Note 8 12mp the LG doesn't stand a chance.

First, having more pixels on a smaller sensor ruins light sensitivity, so the V20 sucks at low light.

Second, those extra pixels are just on the sides of the image. The V20 shoots in 16:9 while the S7, S8, N8, Pixel, and others are shooting at 4:3. By the time you crop the image you are working with the same pixel count in any 1:1 region of the image.

Third you like to talk about zooming in or cropping the image. Well I already explained how you don't have more pixels above, but unlike the Note 8 and iPhone 7/8/X the V20 also lacks 2x optical zoom for getting closer to that white board of notes with ZERO loss in detail.

So go enjoy your lower quality camera simply because of a higher MP.

 

[Aquila]

16mp vs 12mp all other things the same, 16mp would be better.

Only if the sensor was 33% larger on the 16 MP... and even then, it's not guaranteed.

Second, those extra pixels are just on the sides of the image. The V20 shoots in 16:9 while the S7, S8, N8, Pixel, and others are shooting at 4:3. By the time you crop the image you are working with the same pixel count in any 1:1 region of the image.

And this is why. That 4:3 image, for the surface area it covers, is the exact same surface area covered by the 16:9 image for that content, with additional content being stretched out to each side. It's called field of view. Here's a random example from Googling the concept:

So the only way to make that 16:9 sharper on any content in the field of view that they share, ie: the 4:3 area, would be to change the resolution of the common space. The V20 does not do that.

So all other things being equal, you'd get the exact same photograph. But all other things aren't equal, the image quality on most other flagships is far superior in any apples to apples comparison, including, to the best of my knowledge, the ability to zoom in on specific content. Because that's dictated by software, light, etc... and not by the aspect ratio and not by the megapixel count.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

Second, those extra pixels are just on the sides of the image. The V20 shoots in 16:9 while the S7, S8, N8, Pixel, and others are shooting at 4:3. By the time you crop the image you are working with the same pixel count in any 1:1 region of the image.

So the only way to make that 16:9 sharper on any content in the field of view that they share, ie: the 4:3 area, would be to change the resolution of the common space. The V20 does not do that.

Guys, a bit of correction.

V20 shoots in 4:3 natively. The IMX298 is a 1/2.8" 4:3 native 16MP BSI CMOS sensor whilst the V10's IMX234 was a 1/2.6" 16MP BSI CMOS sensor that shot in 16:9 native. The V30's IMX351 on the other hand is a 1/3.1" 4:3 native 16MP BSI CMOS sensor.

 

[Aquila]

Guys, a bit of correction.

V20 shoots in 4:3 natively. The IMX298 is a 1/2.8" 4:3 native 16MP BSI CMOS sensor whilst the V10's IMX234 was a 1/2.6" 16MP BSI CMOS sensor that shot in 16:9 native. The V30's IMX351 on the other hand is a 1/3.1" 4:3 native 16MP BSI CMOS sensor.

Roger that, I was thinking all three were 16:9.