Increase effective sensor size in SuperZooms?

I've read that a lower pixel density means better clarity and detail. If I get a 14MPix 1/2.3" sensor superzoom, is it possible to "increase" sensor size ("reduce" pixel density) by reducing the resolution to 8/10 MPix to get better clarity/detail?

Thanks.

Short answer, no.
The sensor size stays the same, the pixel size stays the same, you just use less of it.
So for a fixed print size you get less clarity/detail not more.

Buy a different camera with larger sensor and same number of pixels, or with same size sensor and less pixels - then you should see that it's much better in low light, and overall the sensor may be better, it depends on the software in the camera.

One of the most compelling reasons to invest in a digital SLR is the much larger sensor size and resulting superior image quality. With compact superzoom cameras you're going to get a small sensor and there's no way top work around that. Sony made a superzoom with a DSLR-sized sensor a few years ago. You could look for a used one of those. It's was called the R1. Here's a link to the user reviews:

Sony Cybershot R1 User Reviews >>

However, the R1 is as big as a digital SLR and they're so inexpensive now you might as well just buy a new entry-level DSLR. If its small size you're after, take a look at our EVIL & Micro Four Thirds Cameras Forum for cameras that have bigger sensors in compact-sized bodies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atharva

I've read that a lower pixel density means better clarity and detail.
....

---

I wouldn't put it that way. I'm going through this right now with my new 10Mpix Canon S95 point-and-shoot (small sensor) which I'm comparing with my 10Mpix Nikon D200 DSLR (lage sensor) with 18-200 superzoom.

- The Canon has a limited range 3.8x zoom lens which is optimised for image quality in low light
- The Nikon has a 11x superzoom for maximum versatility
- The Canon point-and-shoot resolves slightly more detail than the Nikon, despite it's tiny sensor. In the right conditions, prints from the Canon look really good
- However as soon as you put them in contrasty conditions (bright sunlight) the Nikon easily outdoes the Canon. Highlights on the point and shoot look harsh and blow out. White clouds just don't look good.

The bigger sensor brings you a more subtle image in extreme conditions. Personally I would go with a DSLR every time (the S95 is a 3rd camera for my work)

Most cameras use that very trick you mentioned to achieve a pseudo high sensitivity mode. But the results are always sub par, and to be honest, very seldom produce usable results unless you're going for web publishing or small prints.