MP relevance?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by al, Aug 21, 2005.

  1. al

    al Guest

    I hear some slightly conflicting opinions on this, so hopefully one of you
    guys can help me out! I'm considering both a 5MP and a 6.3MP camera at the
    moment and wondering if I should care about the difference in MP at all?
    Chances are I'm never going to blow the pictures up above A4 (maybe the odd
    A3 print for effect, but it's not very likely I'll have a good enough colour
    A3 printer for it to matter too much.

    Most of the time, my pictures will be for cropping down to about 640x480
    type size for the web - sometimes to print (smaller than A4 though) via
    online printers/developers.

    Should I care about the 1.3MP difference?




    a
     
    al, Aug 21, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. al

    Mark² Guest

    No.
    You should be more concerned with other features and characteristics between
    the two cameras you're considering.

    If, by chance, the 6MP is a DSLR (like a Digital Rebel, or Nikon D70), then
    you will definitely benefit from all the other aspects.

    You might want to check to see what the actual physical size of the sensors
    are in the two models. if they are of different size, I would lean toward
    whichever is physically larger, as this effects teh level of noise they will
    induce. But it the size is only proportionally larger on the 6.3MP, then it
    won't matter much. Again...If you're talking about DSLR vs. a
    point-and-shoot, the difference will be dramatically in favor of the DSLR.
     
    Mark², Aug 21, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. al

    al Guest

    Nah, both point & shoot at the £300 or so mark. Fuji S7000 (2 years old)
    vs. Canon S2 IS (new). Two days ago I was ready to buy the S7000, but now
    I'm leaning towards the S2. But I haven't physically held an S2 yet so I'll
    have to hunt one down in the shops tomorrow!

    Plenty of good things about both. Bad things are probably more important.
    For the S7000; poor ISO options, irrelevant RAW and interpolated 12MP
    settings (and harsh JPEG compression on all other resolutions), 2 year old
    CCD technology, 6x optical zoom, no zoom in movie mode. For the S2; a
    little on the dinky size for me, no top mounting flash option and alleged
    poor popup flash red-eye wise, no RAW mode, don't like silver as much as
    black, EVF not as good.


    Garrrghhhh ... I can't decide! S2 I think - most of my "complaints" aren't
    that serious. Don't know though. Maybe I'll flip a coin. At least I can
    do a good macro snap of the coin afterwards ... ;o)




    a
     
    al, Aug 21, 2005
    #3
  4. al

    Mark² Guest

    How about a used 10D DSLR, or 300D? Or perhaps even a D60?
    Any of these--even with a cheapo kit lens--will get you far superior image
    quality...along with flash mounts...longer battery life...optical
    viewfinders...capacity for future expansion via lenses, etc., and likely
    little more cash required (if any).
     
    Mark², Aug 21, 2005
    #4
  5. al

    Ken Wright Guest

    That S2 looks nice though :)

    Got some good reviews behind it

    Regards
    Ken....................
     
    Ken Wright, Aug 22, 2005
    #5
  6. al

    Rich Guest

    My C8080 Olympus has a dedicated flash
    mount and will match most DSLRs in the 6-8
    meg range for resolution owing to it's superior
    lens. However, where DSLRs do shine (in addition to being flexible) is
    low noise at higher
    ISOs.
     
    Rich, Aug 22, 2005
    #6
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.