Which is better for digital camera CCD1 1 8 inch 4 million pixels or CCD1 2 5 inch 10 million pixels

In principle, the CCD is good, but the evaluation of a camera requires a comprehensive evaluation, it is recommended that you add the specific brands and models of the two cameras to be compared, so that you can give more appropriate suggestions.

Added: 45 and 95 comparisons --- my opinion:

CCD and lenses are the core. In addition to CCD size、Manual function,95Optical image stabilization、Tens of millions of pixels、Most items such as face priority focus are strong,If it is mainly used at home,I personally feel that there is no need to change,45It can be basically satisfied,Anyway, you need to print and enlarge **Very little; If you have a hobby of photography, like to take pictures of travel, scenery, street sweeping and other fun, 95 will be easier to use and much lighter. If you have a low-grade fever in your photography hobby, it is recommended not to change it, and when the right opportunity is right, you can change it to a more powerful one, this machine will not burn red.

Think this is enough. Use it until it breaks.

Now 10 million, 12 million, the CCD area is not as large as this, and the imaging quality is not as good as this.

The next time I buy it, I want to buy 1 inch, and the prime is 800 12 million.

If the CCD area is reduced, it is better not to change it

The CCD area is large, and the pixel height is king

The difference between 400w and 1000w is a bit far.

If you only wash 6 inches**, it is recommended that you do not need to change it.

If you only look at it on a computer, and it is not more than 6 inches when printed. Of course it's the original good.

If you want to print the photo to more than 7 inches, it is 1000w.

Of course, the pixel height is good, and the pixel difference is so big. Under the same pixels, you look at the size of the CCD.

Sharpness is high enough, but dynamic range and high-sensitivity image quality won't be ideal.

Clarity mainly depends on the resolution. The higher the resolution, the more detail there is. At the same time, the advantage is also more obvious when printing a large **. 16 million pixels are enough to print a high-precision 20-inch**.

Dynamic range mainly depends on pixel density. The higher the pixel density (i.e., the same sensor size, with high pixels), the worse the dynamic range and high-sensitivity image quality.

When shooting with high contrast**, it's easy to overexpose highlights or lose detail in shadows.

In low-light environments, higher ISO values also make noise more likely to occur.

Personally, I think that the general 1-inch sensor is a home camera (card player or telephoto camera), and the possibility of developing 20-inch photos at home is extremely small. Generally, household use is mostly for flushing 5 inches or 7 inches**. Large format ** is mostly used for commercial photography, but it is generally shot with a professional DSLR or larger camera.

And when you look at it on a computer, you will generally zoom in to full screen at most.

Therefore, the advantages of high resolution in general households cannot be brought into play.

While home users can't tightly control the ideal light ratio or use it for long periods of time** as they do in a studio, high-contrast scenes are often encountered outdoors (e.g., bright skies, dark shadows), and high ISO is often required to achieve optimal shutter speeds when shooting indoors.

Therefore, it is not recommended for home users to choose a card player or telephoto player with too high resolution. Generally, 10 million pixels is high enough resolution for home users. The high-resolution card machines produced by some brands are often just publicity gimmicks.

Like some flagship card machines, such as Canon G12, Lumix LX5, Nikon P7000, etc., also do not use very high resolution. And now even low-end card machines have 12 million to 14 million pixels. Therefore, it is recommended to choose a model with a lower pixel ratio if the sensor size is the same.

Hello, it is a pleasure to serve you and give you the following answer: 12 million pixels of clarity is okay, but sometimes blurry situations occur, which is caused by the light being too dark or too bright when shooting, or because the lens of the camera is out of focus, etc. Workaround:

1.When shooting, pay attention to choosing the appropriate light, and try to avoid shooting the light that is too dark or too bright, so as to avoid blurring when shooting. 2.

Pay attention to check whether the lens of the camera is out of focus, and correct it in time if it is out of focus, so as not to affect the clarity of the shooting. 3.Pay attention to check the camera's settings, such as ISO value, shutter speed, etc., before shooting to ensure the clarity of the shot.

4.If the shooting is too dark, you can try to use the compensation function to adjust the brightness of the liquid image to get a clearer image. 5.

If the shot is too bright, you can try using the compensation function to adjust the darkness of the image to get a sharper shot. 6.Try to avoid using the digital zoom function when shooting, as this will affect the sharpness of the image.

7.Use color filters whenever possible to improve the clarity of your shots. 8.

Try to avoid using low-priced lenses when shooting, as it can affect the sharpness of the image.

1. All without considering the brand, technical level, and process, and believing that the data are true, the latter is so good.

First of all, 1 is a little bigger than 1, so you can collect a little more light.

Then, even with the same size sensor, the higher the pixels, the higher your resolution; **In the case of the same size, the more delicate it will be.

But to be honest, the difference between these two parameters is too subtle, and I don't know if the difference between the more than 10 million pixels of such a small sensor is calculated, and it is difficult to evaluate which one must be better.

If you choose a card machine, it is difficult to see the difference in this imaging, see which function is good (optical zoom, noise reduction, waterproof, etc.), and it would be good to be practical.

Hello! Pixels only determine the format size of the output**, and are not the main condition that affects the image quality (including sharpness), nor is it the main factor in choosing a digital camera.

The image sensor (CCD) used in home digital cameras is currently only about 1 inch in size. At the current level of manufacturing technology, it is appropriate to design a CCD with less than 1200W pixels on a CCD of this area size. Some of the new models have been upgraded to 1500W pixels, which is already starting to exceed the pixel capacity limit of the CCD - on the contrary, there is the possibility of increased noise and reduced image quality due to the phenomenon of "electronic thermal drift".

Therefore, it is neither necessary nor wise to blindly pursue high pixels.

At present, there are more than 3,000 top consumer models on the market, such as Canon's G series and Panasonic's LX series, which are equipped with about 10 million pixels - the purpose is to pursue high image quality.

If you have to choose between "CCD1 14.1 million pixels and 116 million pixels" with the same configuration conditions (lens, image processor, etc.), you should choose "CCD1 14.1 million pixels" with basically no difference in CCD area size and low pixel density.

In the case of the same CCD area size, the imaging quality of the "low pixel density point" is more guaranteed.

In fact, cameras with more than 10 million pixels need to care too much about pixels. Because if you really want to shoot a clear **, lens-aperture-ccd, all three have an impact. Otherwise, the SLR is also tens of millions of pixels, and the price is indeed much higher, mainly because the lens is valuable.

--Digital Lovers] Team Genuine Road.

At a certain CCD area, the higher the pixels, the better the effect.

There is a misconception that the higher the pixel of the CCD with the same area, the smaller the area of the individual core-modified pixel, so the heavier the noise. This is a plausible fallacy based solely on subjective imagination to draw annihilation.

For example, with a 1-inch CCD, one is made into 6 million pixels, and the other is made into 12 million pixels, after shooting, the same 1000*1000 local view is also captured, and the noise of 12 million pixels is indeed heavier.

However, be aware that this is a comparison of the area of 1 6 and 1 12. Such comparisons are unfair.

It should be 1000*1000 parts of 6 million pixels, and 1414*1414 of 12 million pixels should be compared, which is fair.

In fact, if you use software to reduce the ** of 1200 pixels to 6 million pixels, the actual effect will be better than the original 6 million.

This is because, if two pixels are merged, the increase in noise after averaging is canceled out. However, due to the progress of the actual process and the finer object of the noise reduction processing algorithm at high pixels, the image quality of high pixels will be better than that of low pixels.

Conclusion: The "average" noise level of the high pixels is comparable to that of the low pixels, while the resolution is increased. As a result, the image quality is better with high pixels.

Another: The above "Fascination of Her King" is about 07 years, when the mainstream household sock camera on the market was 8 million pixels, which matched the resolution of the lens.

Now, it's '09.

The current CCD is different from 07. The current lens is also different from 07.