Mega Pixel race is like the Mhz Race

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Hugo Drax, Jan 11, 2004.

  1. Hugo Drax

    Hugo Drax Guest

    In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume higher
    MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get noiser and MP
    will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most snapshots are
    never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.
    Hugo Drax, Jan 11, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hugo Drax

    Another Bob Guest

    Hugo Drax wrote:

    > In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume
    > higher MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get
    > noiser and MP will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most
    > snapshots are never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.


    Hmmm... Well, it seems to me that what I often need is some small portion of
    a larger image. But that noise thing, now that could be a problem.
    Another Bob, Jan 11, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Hugo Drax

    Don Stauffer Guest

    I guess I am not an ordinary consumer then, as I almost never print out
    digital images that small. Mostly 8 x 10, and now I have a large format
    printer.

    'course, for snapshot use I just use my film camera.

    Hugo Drax wrote:
    >
    > In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume higher
    > MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get noiser and MP
    > will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most snapshots are
    > never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.


    --
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota

    webpage- http://www.usfamily.net/web/stauffer
    Don Stauffer, Jan 11, 2004
    #3
  4. In article <btqpa0$acjta$-berlin.de>,
    "Hugo Drax" <> wrote:

    > In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume higher
    > MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get noiser and MP
    > will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most snapshots are
    > never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.
    >


    Sony doesn't produce high-end consumer equipment so lets leave them out
    of this.

    For now, the pixel count is significant. For the professional, they
    provide the sharpness required for large prints. For the photo
    hobbyist, they help recover a poor quality photo so it's at least good
    for online viewing.

    There are still many factors to consider, though. I think most digicams
    have too much shutter lag to be useful. I was getting autofocus lag
    yesterday on my Canon 300D when I was photographing a party in the dark.
    It brought back bad memories of digicams that always lagged like that.
    Kevin McMurtrie, Jan 11, 2004
    #4
  5. Hugo Drax

    Hugo Drax Guest

    "Kevin McMurtrie" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <btqpa0$acjta$-berlin.de>,
    > "Hugo Drax" <> wrote:
    >
    > > In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume

    higher
    > > MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get noiser and

    MP
    > > will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most snapshots are
    > > never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.
    > >

    >
    > Sony doesn't produce high-end consumer equipment so lets leave them out
    > of this.
    >
    > For now, the pixel count is significant. For the professional, they
    > provide the sharpness required for large prints. For the photo
    > hobbyist, they help recover a poor quality photo so it's at least good
    > for online viewing.
    >
    > There are still many factors to consider, though. I think most digicams
    > have too much shutter lag to be useful. I was getting autofocus lag
    > yesterday on my Canon 300D when I was photographing a party in the dark.
    > It brought back bad memories of digicams that always lagged like that.


    I am not sure what glass you used but a 1.4 50mm or L primes focus in low
    light quick.
    Hugo Drax, Jan 12, 2004
    #5
  6. Hugo Drax

    Hugo Drax Guest

    "Kevin McMurtrie" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <btqpa0$acjta$-berlin.de>,
    > "Hugo Drax" <> wrote:
    >
    > > In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume

    higher
    > > MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get noiser and

    MP
    > > will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most snapshots are
    > > never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.
    > >

    >
    > Sony doesn't produce high-end consumer equipment so lets leave them out
    > of this.
    >
    > For now, the pixel count is significant. For the professional, they
    > provide the sharpness required for large prints. For the photo
    > hobbyist, they help recover a poor quality photo so it's at least good
    > for online viewing.


    but I prefer big sensor. I shoot 1600.
    Hugo Drax, Jan 12, 2004
    #6
  7. Hugo Drax

    Mark Herring Guest

    I have a hunch that an 8MP image down-sampled to 5-6 MP may be better
    that native 5-6 MP.

    I'm getting some good results with a 2MP---including a lot of
    stitching.

    6.3MP seems fantastic to me.

    8X10 at 300 ppi is 2400 X 3000 = 7.2 MP (6 + is "close enough". I
    want the price of this to come down much more than I want more MP.

    On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:10:54 -0500, "Hugo Drax" <>
    wrote:

    >In the consumer market uninformed consumers will automatically assume higher
    >MP = better. And Sony Marketing knows this so Images will get noiser and MP
    >will increase but consumers will keep lining up since most snapshots are
    >never enlarged past 4x6 anyways.
    >


    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    Mark Herring, Jan 12, 2004
    #7
  8. Hugo Drax

    Phil Guest

    On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 20:26:35 -0800, Mark Herring
    <> wrote:

    >I have a hunch that an 8MP image down-sampled to 5-6 MP may be better
    >that native 5-6 MP.

    I've seen a statement to this effect in a recent review of the Fuji
    Finepix S5000.

    Phil
    Phil, Jan 12, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Nate Goulet
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    697
    FoxWolfie Galen
    Feb 22, 2005
  2. Peter Fournia

    Computer lockup at 133 Mhz, not at 100 Mhz

    Peter Fournia, Dec 18, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    571
    Brian H¹©
    Dec 18, 2003
  3. Pierre Dragh

    Good camera 3 mega pixel

    Pierre Dragh, Nov 14, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    348
    Andy Hewitt
    Nov 14, 2003
  4. Minolta Man

    mega-pixel question

    Minolta Man, Jun 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    1,184
    Big Bill
    Jun 19, 2004
  5. WannabeSomeone

    Fuji FinePix S9000 9 Mega Pixel Camera Came Out 17 Mega Pixel?

    WannabeSomeone, Nov 14, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,115
    WannabeSomeone
    Nov 14, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page