PDA

View Full Version : camera pixels



brandysson
24-04-2005, 10:41 AM
Hello, This may not be your thing but here goes?
With digital camera prices dropping can you guys tell me what is a medium amount or range of pixels is ok to aim for. I understand that pixels make for definition and better pictures but are expensive! What does the team think is the best within a medium price range. I understand the answer is obvious But money does count a bit lol
Thanks and best regards

wotz
24-04-2005, 10:48 AM
3 or 4 MP are fine for most people. If you want to print large copies or crop small parts of an image then you will need more. I had a 2.1 mp for 5 years and now a 4. They are both perfectly fine for my use.

There is an argument that larger mp cameras have larger sensors, and will produce a 'cleaner' image. Most people won't notice the difference.

FoxyMX
24-04-2005, 11:07 AM
Unless you are into printing enlargements of your photos then, as wotz said, three or four megapixels will be sufficient.

Do remember that the more megapixels you have the bigger the photo size and therefore the larger the memory card size will need to be, not to mention the storage requirements either on the hard drive or on CDs/DVDs once you get a sizeable collection. You do tend to take a lot more photos when it doesn't cost you anything to take them. :p

the highlander
24-04-2005, 11:29 AM
You will see a lot of B/S written in advertising about pixel rating but that is only part of the equation. A 2 megapixel camera with a ccd sensor is going to cream any mythical 3/4 megapixel camera with a cmos sensor as far as sharpness, colour, saturation etc. You can see 12 megapixel cameras for sale on trade me :groan: My @ss they are 12 megapixel they are simply interpolated from a 3 meg cmos sensor and I cant begin to think how crappy they must be.
3 meg as othesr have said is fine, 4 is better, anything more is overkill unless you are a hard core photographer.
Buy a brand you have heard of, fuji, canon, pentax, olympus yes. Makagon, Vivatar, Digir8 NO
I have 3 casio exilims (1,2 meg,2.0 meg and 4 meg), Fuji s304, fuji a205 and the highest being 4 meg and I use that cam least of all.

Scouse
24-04-2005, 11:43 AM
Hi brandysson. I've had a wee 2.1 with a 4x zoom for some time and love it. Slips in to my pocket and I take (and later delete nearly all) dozens of pictures on a walk. Nothing fancy. It is a Microtek, reviewed and recommended in PC World once and I bought it on impulse from that. ;)

godfather
24-04-2005, 12:46 PM
Agreed. A 2 MP camera can deliver surprising results.

I have a 2.3 MP Fuji MX2700, 3(6 Interpolated) MP Fuji S602 and have just bought a 3.2 MP Nikon Coolpix. I simply have no need for a resolutiuon higher than 3 MP.

I have tried an A2 size enlargement from a 3 MP shot, it is very good.

The Coolpix I have just bought cost me $195+GST ($220) as an end-of-line (last in shop) special.
It has 3 x optical zoom, and uses 2 x AA batteries (rechargeable or Alkaline). It was for these characteristics I bought it, plus its very small (shirt pocket) size, for travelling with.

Consider zoom, battery type and memory type when buying.
Optical Zoom is good, Digital Zoom is not an asset (useful but needs optical as well)
If travelling, AA cells are good, you don't have to carry the charger. Lithium-Ion specialised batteries are expensive if you need a spare.
These things are all very thirsty on batteries and recharging can be a problem on the road. Memory is cheap now, a 512 MB SD card is about $83 and holds 600 shots.

Look for end-of-model specials on 3 or 4 MP cameras and you could do OK.

Scouse
24-04-2005, 02:34 PM
Hi brandysson. As always, covered well by GF, but, as you mentioned limited cash, that you must seriously consider the cost of a suitable memory card and a battery charger. As GF mentions, he has a 512 MB card which holds 600 shots. You can go down to first one I bought, being a 64 MB which held about 120 shots - depends on what use you will get from the camera between downloads to your system. :cool:

vinref
24-04-2005, 03:04 PM
The entry-level price of ~$500 is now populated mostly by 4+ megapixel, 3+x optical zoom cameras. Stick to the main brands as they have all the fruit - CCD, scene modes, USB to PC, video, etc. I recommend particularly the Canon A-series, but also Sony, Pentax, Casio and Kodak. Do a google for "4 megapixel digital camera ~review ~test ~comparison".

Graham L
24-04-2005, 03:17 PM
The cards are becoming cheaper (almost day by day). So that's not such a problem. I can remember seeing, not too long ago, a 1GB CF costing over $3000.

The ultra cheap (except when bought from infomercials ;)) tiny cameras will probably be a disappointment. Anything from the 2 or 3 MP ones upwards will probably be fine. You really need a LCD screen. An optical zoom is good to have; the higher the better. "Digital zoom" is useless for taking pictures --- it's really only for looking at parts of pictures on the LCD viewfinder after they are taken.

Murray P
24-04-2005, 05:33 PM
You will see a lot of B/S written in advertising about pixel rating but that is only part of the equation. A 2 megapixel camera with a ccd sensor is going to cream any mythical 3/4 megapixel camera with a cmos sensor as far as sharpness, colour, saturation etc. You can see 12 megapixel cameras for sale on trade me :groan: My @ss they are 12 megapixel they are simply interpolated from a 3 meg cmos sensor and I cant begin to think how crappy they must be.
3 meg as othesr have said is fine, 4 is better, anything more is overkill unless you are a hard core photographer.
Buy a brand you have heard of, fuji, canon, pentax, olympus yes. Makagon, Vivatar, Digir8 NO
I have 3 casio exilims (1,2 meg,2.0 meg and 4 meg), Fuji s304, fuji a205 and the highest being 4 meg and I use that cam least of all.

Not entirely correct. It will depend on the size of the cmos sensor. The Canon EOS 300D uses a cmos not a cdd, but because the sensor is approximately 3/4 size of 35mm film and it uses no interpolation to produce the raw data whereas most ccd sensors are usually a small fraction of that size (1/4 for the Sony F828). When it first came out, the 300D creamed equivalent cameras that used ccd sensors, one reason being the larger sensor did no have the same issues or cross talk between the receptors.

Be that as it may, I agree, you don't don't need to stuff all the pixels available with the higher res cameras to get good results unless you have a specific need for fine detail in closeup.

Side by side 6-8meg caneras. (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Ccanon_eos300d%2Cfuji_finep ixs7000%2Csony_dscf828&show=all)

the highlander
24-04-2005, 08:58 PM
Not entirely correct. It will depend on the size of the cmos sensor. The Canon EOS 300D uses a cmos not a cdd, but because the sensor is approximately 3/4 size of 35mm film and it uses no interpolation to produce the raw data whereas most ccd sensors are usually a small fraction of that size (1/4 for the Sony F828). When it first came out, the 300D creamed equivalent cameras that used ccd sensors, one reason being the larger sensor did no have the same issues or cross talk between the receptors.

Be that as it may, I agree, you don't don't need to stuff all the pixels available with the higher res cameras to get good results unless you have a specific need for fine detail in closeup.

Side by side 6-8meg caneras. (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Ccanon_eos300d%2Cfuji_finep ixs7000%2Csony_dscf828&show=all)

I stand corrected :blush: that a cmos sensor cannot equal a ccd sensor, but and its a big but, the Canon EOS 300D is not your average consumer camera and I stand by that all things being equal, cmos sensors that are used in generally available in consumer cams are not the equal of ccd sensors

Murray P
24-04-2005, 09:13 PM
I stand corrected :blush: that a cmos sensor cannot equal a ccd sensor, but and its a big but, the Canon EOS 300D is not your average consumer camera and I stand by that all things being equal, cmos sensors that are used in generally available in consumer cams are not the equal of ccd sensors

Fair enough :thumbs: , the Canon example probably isn't that relevant to the original topic. It will depend, of course, on the needs of the user (the thread starter).