Newbie question - Difference between 2meg and 3Meg cameras ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by BertieBigBollox@gmail.com, Feb 12, 2007.

  1. Guest

    OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    pixels.....

    In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

    Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    sizes ???
     
    , Feb 12, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Heslop Guest

    "" wrote:
    >
    > OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    > pixels.....
    >
    > In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    > getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....
    >
    > Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    > size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    > unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    > sizes ???


    It's more what you can do with the images afterwards. The good thing
    about smaller file sizes is, of course, the ability to cram tons of
    shots on one card. I have a two and a three meg cam, I can see the
    difference in the images, enough so I can check out detail more easily
    on the 3mb one, plus editing them down, trimming anything unwanted
    from the edge of a quick shot, say, will still leave you with a usable
    file size on the bigger one.


    --
    Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
    -------------------------------------------------------
    Stop and Look
    http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
     
    Paul Heslop, Feb 12, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. wrote:
    > OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    > pixels.....
    >
    > In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    > getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....
    >
    > Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    > size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    > unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    > sizes ???


    There are some who say that at least 200 pixels per inch of print is
    desirable, so that would mean at least (5 x 200) x (7 x 200) => 1.4MP.
    Others say 300 pixels per inch, so that would mean 3MP. Allowing a
    little for cropping, would suggest at least 3MP.

    I have seen A4 prints (210 x 297mm) from a Nikon 990 camera (just over
    3MP) and they were fine. Providing it's sharp and well exposed, the
    content of the print matters far more than the number of megapixels.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Feb 12, 2007
    #3
  4. SimonLW Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    > pixels.....
    >
    > In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    > getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....
    >
    > Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    > size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    > unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    > sizes ???
    >

    All else being the same, both the 2 or 3 mp camera is fine for 4x6 prints.
    For 5x7 both will work but you start to stretch 2 mp a bit.

    A simple check is divide the number of horizontal pixels in the image by the
    length of the print (horizontal is used because vertical is often cropped to
    fit the print). the result should be in the 250-300 range. For example, a
    2mp camera may have 1600 pixels horizontally. 1600/7=229 (using a 5x7
    print). 229 is okay, but may look a bit soft to some. A 3 mp camera will do
    286, which should be fine.

    This basic check should be weighted as prints get larger because viewing
    distance increases. A 11x14 print should be fine for viewing in the 200 -250
    range.
    -S
     
    SimonLW, Feb 12, 2007
    #4
  5. On Feb 12, 4:56 am, ""
    <> wrote:
    > OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    > pixels.....
    >
    > In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    > getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....
    >
    > Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    > size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    > unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    > sizes ???


    This depends a lot on the subject. Some scenes with a lot of fine
    detail will, even in a 4 x 6 show better results with 3 than 2. I
    would recommend a 3Mp camera as the minimum acceptable even for
    snapshots.

    Of course, the thing is, you can never predict the future. Your
    intent now may be nothing serious, but you never know when you will
    come across an object, scene, or new interest when you really will
    want an 8 x 10 blowup :) Even 5-6 Mp cameras today aren't that
    expensive.
     
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Feb 12, 2007
    #5
  6. ray Guest

    On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 02:56:12 -0800, wrote:

    > OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    > pixels.....
    >
    > In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    > getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....
    >
    > Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    > size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    > unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    > sizes ???


    The most demanding limit I've seen is 300dpi for 'photographic' quality.
    300x4x300x6 = 2,160,000. 2MP should be more that sufficient. I've had
    excellent results printing 1MP (1152x864) on 8x10.
     
    ray, Feb 12, 2007
    #6
  7. Dave Cohen Guest

    wrote:
    > OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
    > pixels.....
    >
    > In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
    > getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....
    >
    > Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
    > size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
    > unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
    > sizes ???
    >


    The quick answer is no, provided you are talking about utilizing the
    whole shot. However, (there always is a however), it being a fact of
    life that you would be hard put to find a new camera capable of showing
    any differences if there were any (i.e. decent lens etc.), your question
    at this point is more academic than practical. By the time you read this
    even 3mb cameras will be gone. Of course, if you are talking used that's
    a different matter. My old A40 canon took great shots at 2mp.
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Feb 12, 2007
    #7
  8. Guest

    Thanks for the help everyone....
     
    , Feb 13, 2007
    #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. Kieron Joy
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    633
    www.BradReese.Com
    Aug 17, 2005
  2. Scott Townsend
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    703
    Rod Dorman
    Mar 29, 2006
  3. zxcvar
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,757
    Dave Martindale
    Sep 9, 2003
  4. 1G USB drive only showing 3meg.

    , Feb 19, 2008, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    478
  5. Lukagain Cos ThistleBounce

    How to split a 3Meg avi file

    Lukagain Cos ThistleBounce, Oct 21, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    532
    ~misfit~
    Oct 22, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page