They expect buyers to choose a camera based on MP... sorto like when Intel was pushing CPU clock speeds even when it meant sacrificing in some other aspect of the CPU, because they expected buyers to choose a CPU based on clock speed...

MP sells. It's a stat that's easily marketable. Even B+H, whose management and perhaps a non-trivial part of it's customer base presumably *does* know that more MP is not necessarily better, highlights MP numbers in their catalogs..

It should be noted that it's not entirely true that more MP on the same sensor size means more noise or worse image quality. A lot depends on the technology of the sensor and the processors that work with the data. Microlenses also influence things (fill factor), as might lens design (with extreme wides and lack of microlenses, anyway)..

For a fairly stark difference, compare ISO 1600+ shots from the Olympus E-1 to the Olympus E-510. The latter has twice the number of pixels in the same area, and furthermore might have a lower fill factor due to needing to devote some area to providing video output for live view but the technologies involved have improved in the meantime, making the latter model a better choice than the E-1 for many (probably most) people..

It might also be noted that if a model is providing excellent image quality, it might be acceptable or preferable for some purposes to have merely good quality with more MP even without leaps and bounds in tech or design..

But yes, if you're packing more MP per unit area -without- relevant improvements in designs and processes, and if you were already marginal (ex. most compacts at high ISO), there might be problems...

Harry2007 wrote:.

Ok, I am new to photography. I own an old Canon S60 (and planning toupgrade to a new model, probably the next Fuji f50fd)..

I learned a lot of new things in this forum (thanks!)..

One thing that still puzzle me, about the MP resolution..

More MP ... small sensor > produce more noise..

If this is the case, why they create camera with more and more MP?.

Marketing. The average camera customer needs a number to fixate on in order to determine value. That number is Megapixel Count..

Why not stick with 5 or 6 MP?.

You have lots of company....

If they cant produce good IQ with high MP, why make one?.

Because they can sell it, regardless of the IQ..

Just dont get it .

People are crazy!.

At first, I tought that more MP = better IQ  But not anymore.However, I still confuse ... Why Canon/Sony/etc. produce camera withmore MP ... but still using such small sensor ....

Any good explanation?.

Larger sensors are more costly..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

More megapixels sells waaaaay better. Ask the average P&S user what advantages a 10MP has over a 6MP - they'll tell you that it takes better pictures, nine times out of ten..

Oops..

But hey - that's exactly what the manufacturers want them to think..

Me? I use 6MP because I don't make big prints...

Thanks for all your answers guys  I do understand now ..

Just to add another dimension....

10MP cameras (DSLR's) can pretty much produce images as good as 6MP DSLR cameras these days..

10MP allows you be able to crop pretty deep within the original image and still have a very high quality image to print. This can be handy to crop into a person's face on a full body shot (if that wasn't your initial intent), or another small portion of your original composition and still get a great looking image..

But for most people, 6MP is more than enough..

Just wanted to bring another side of the debate to the table ..

Small sensors arent on consumer cameras because they are cheaper. They allow things like 10X f2.8 cameras you can fit in your pocket or 18X superzooms that dont require a set of wheels. You pay for that convenience in image quality..

Back in film days APS cameras filled the requirements of your average P&S consumer quite nicely. And 35mm SLR filled the requirements of most advanced photographers. But there was still a place for large format film cameras..

I like having a carry-everywhere small camera I can make large prints from. And I dont mind some PP to bring the image up to speed. While the pixel race has served my purposes I think it has been counterproductive for the average buyer. Had they spent the development effort in making better 5 or 6Mp sensors they would probably have served the interest of the average small sensor camera buyer a lot better than pushing the edges of sensor density..

Fuji refined the 6Mp sensor and never achieved the market share they hoped for. They have evidently given up on refining the lower pixel sensor and have rejoined the pixel race. That is determined by marketing success. If the average buyer wants more Mp then that is what they have to provide..

If you follow the resolution in the dpreview tests there has been a steady improvement in actual resolving capability with the increase in Mp. While that might be significant to some consumers I doubt it is for most...