I found this product review at Bench Mark Magazine which expresses a similar opinion as our articles on Megapixels. There is much more to consider when selecting a camera than how many megapixels it is.
One of the key points made is the compression engine used
Indeed, many see the term ‘megapixel’ as a reassurance of high quality, but this isn’t the case. If, for example, you had 1.3 million pixels of poorly processed video with little colour accuracy or range, the reality is that you would have an unusable picture – but it would still be a 1.3 megapixel image!
Let us know your opinion
- What is your experience in testing different brands of the same resolution?
It has been my first notion that when it comes to electronics – the higher the megapixels, the better the product. However, upon reading what you said, I asked my brothers who are gadget-freaks and they explained it to me further why higher MPs does not really mean a camera or TV is better than the others that have slightly lower megapixels. It’s still quite puzzling for me, but now I know better! Thanks for sharing!
Hi
Magapixels is the increasing and result is more clear. Result is mainly depend upon the pixels.
thanks,
Hi Jac
Thanks for your comment.
I do not believe it is about the pixel count but rather the compression.
I have seen many high megapixel cameras give terrible results because they are compressed too much to try to manage the storage and bandwidth.
I would like to see a study on this if anyone knows of one?
When we increase the pixels then we get the better result. To get the better result, WE take this step.
Hi James and thanks for commenting.
Yes more pixels will always give a better result BUT at what price?
You need more storage & more bandwidth but the increase in quality is not always proportional to these increases and installing 2 or more 4CIF cameras can give better angles of view for the same bandwidth.
EG – if looking at a counter of a petrol station, 3X 4CIF security cameras may give a better result (coverage & angle of view) than 1x 2 mega-pixel camera.
What are your thoughts of this approach?
The result of camera is only depend upon the pixels. If we increase the pixels then we have good result.
What about compression?
You can buy a 5 mega-pixel surveillance camera with H.264 compression that has a lower quality image than a 2 mega-pixel also with H.264 if the algorithm is poorly constructed.
Take a look at this article and please let me know your opinion
http://cctvdesign.online/ip-video-dont-believe-the-spec
Of course, mega pixel can create the better result. If we want good result, then we must enhance the megapixels.
Hi Waxing,
It is true more megapixels will give a better result but there are many other factors that affect the end result of the CCTV image.
I am guessing you are commenting based on a digital camera that you take photos with.
These use JPEG compression and are not concerned with how large the file size is.
For a security camera we use h.264 compression in the majority of cameras to reduce the amount of network bandwidth and storage required. Unfortunately there is a lot of variation between manufactures of security cameras as to how well they implement the compression.
Thanks for commenting and good luck with that dog hair!
These megapixels can increase the result of camera. I really like this.
We can do our result better by enhancing the pixels. Result is depend upon the pixels.