I have reached a new conclusion: It seems as though new point and shoot cameras are not as good as older models. Jimmy Joe and I have been on a hunt for a point and shoot upgrade with higher resolution for video. The camera we have right now is a Sony Cybershot my Dad picked out 4 years ago for me, with 6 MegaPixel photo quality and standard definition video. I have decided it can't be beat by any of the new point and shoots available. We purchased one of the newer Sony Cybershots that goes up to 12.1 MP, purported to be a great camera with HD video. So the video was better than our current camera, but all pictures were grainy- whether in low light, indoors, outdoors, whatever. After some research, it
seems this is the problem: the higher MP cameras have so many little sensors (microscopic lenses), one for each individual MP, packed into the whole sensor. Because they have to make room for all these little sensors the normal partitioning walls that separate them are lost. Thus, information spills over into adjacent sensors, creating more noise-- hence the grainy look. This doesn't happen with lower MP cameras because there are fewer sensors for the fewer megapixels, and the partitions remain and are effective. The images we took on the newer model just seemed blurry, blurred edges, and blurred colors. Not blurring from motion, more a grainy blur quality. So we returned it and got our money back. I think we are going to stick with our oldy but goody, with its definitively crisp and clear photos. Conclusion: It appears that more
isn't better, and that older point and shoots with lower MP capability have crisper and cleaner photos that newer ones. Any thoughts?
*Note: This does not apply to DSLRs. They have a larger sensor that avoids this problem. They are awesome.