I have seen cameras with 5-7 MP. Does it mean that they take better photographs? I always thought that to utilize the full functionality of a 5 MP camera, you have to take pictures at that resolution (~ 3000 X 2500). So if I have a 5 MP camera, but I am still taking pics at 800 X 600 or 1200 X 700, then am I just wasting all those extra MP?
Do more MP on a Digital Camera mean a better photo?
- Thread starter TommyVercetti
- Start date
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
Yes
one of the advantages of higher megapixil is the ability to crop & zoom the original picture, also you can enlarge the orig to 8X10 or so without losing resolution.
I've heard 35mm is ~7 megapixels.
one of the advantages of higher megapixil is the ability to crop & zoom the original picture, also you can enlarge the orig to 8X10 or so without losing resolution.
I've heard 35mm is ~7 megapixels.
radioouman
Diamond Member
- Nov 4, 2002
- 8,632
- 0
- 0
If you aren't taking pictures at those higher resolutions, then you are wasting them.
Now, if you take pics at those high resolutions, and then resize them on a computer, you will probably have a better picture than if you just took them at that lower resolution.
Now, if you take pics at those high resolutions, and then resize them on a computer, you will probably have a better picture than if you just took them at that lower resolution.
I just went through this. The camera store guy told me that 2 megapixels was good enough for up to 8x10s. I ended up buying a Nikon Coolpix 4300 (4 MP) which I am really happy with, but I probably could have gone with 2 or 3 MP and not been able to tell the difference. We took my kids Christmas picture with it and I can't see any difference between it and ones taken with our 35mm.
To answer your question, 2 MP is probably ok, and 5+ is probably a waste. The 4's aren't that much more expensive than the 3's. The zoom is probably the most important thing. A lot of cheapie cameras advertise "digital" or "total" (digital x optical) zoom multipliers. Forget that. Make sure you have at least 3x optical zoom.
To answer your question, 2 MP is probably ok, and 5+ is probably a waste. The 4's aren't that much more expensive than the 3's. The zoom is probably the most important thing. A lot of cheapie cameras advertise "digital" or "total" (digital x optical) zoom multipliers. Forget that. Make sure you have at least 3x optical zoom.
I bought an HP Photosmart 315 camera from a fellow Anandtech member for $93 shipped. It's a 2.1 MP camera. While not the greatest, it still takes awesome pictures with the right lighting and of course, if you can keep a still pulse. For taking pictures of the family at gatherings, a camera like mine will do fine. The only thing lacking is the optical zoom, but it is otherwise a good camera.
GTaudiophile
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
It can depend. Having too big of a CCD on a camera with a small lens can create too much noise. Many are concerned about the new Canon S50 for this reason. It's also why some argue that the S30 takes better pictures than the S40/45.
Another thing to consider is the size and shape of the camera. If you can actually hold it before you buy it that would be a good idea. I looked at one little cigarette box one (Kyocera, I think), that I was just to hamfisted to hold comfortably.
DanTMWTMP
Lifer
- Oct 7, 2001
- 15,908
- 19
- 81
yes 5+ is a waste....
i have a 4 mp digicam and i can take huge..huge huge pics...almost poster size.....w/o losing resolution...and yes optical zoom is very important...mine = 4x optical
mine = minolta dimage s404
anything above 7 megapixel is a total waste due to the optics of a camera...which only allow for 7 megapixel MAX
also great pics are taken from good photographers...
here's an example why..
my friend uses the elph 2.0 digicam...and look what quality shots he can take..i knw the pics aren't large, but for pictures this size, it's suitable..
I dunno about anything over 4 mp being a waste.
I can take 6mp shots with mine, and they always turn out good. Some 3mp shots I've had made into 8x10's have some blockiness in the fine detail (this is especially noticible around when photographing stuff with lots of small detail, like a tree with lots of leaves).
In most cases, 3mp is fine for 8x10s. I have a couple B&W 3mp images I took to walmart and had 8x10's made, they're very good and you'd be hard pressed to tell them from film. I stick to 3mp shots, just because I can get an ungodly amount on my memory card, where a 6mp shot is ~17mb each
I can take 6mp shots with mine, and they always turn out good. Some 3mp shots I've had made into 8x10's have some blockiness in the fine detail (this is especially noticible around when photographing stuff with lots of small detail, like a tree with lots of leaves).
In most cases, 3mp is fine for 8x10s. I have a couple B&W 3mp images I took to walmart and had 8x10's made, they're very good and you'd be hard pressed to tell them from film. I stick to 3mp shots, just because I can get an ungodly amount on my memory card, where a 6mp shot is ~17mb each
Yes, a 2+ MP camera can do a decent 8x10 photo. Not great, but decent.
However, then you don't have the ability to crop the photo to make it look really good.
Unless i was doing some medium to large sized professional stills, 2-4 MP is plenty. I'd be more concerned about the quality of the CCD, Optics, features, etc.
However, 5+ MP is definitely not a waste. Generally speaking, you wouldn't use a 35mm camera to do poster work. Medium format and Large format camera's exist for this reason. Higher grain count's on the film lead to sharper, larger images, just like higher MP camera backs/ccds. Personally, I'm feining for a 20MP foveon back for a decent Mamiya or Pentax MFC.
However, 5+ MP is definitely not a waste. Generally speaking, you wouldn't use a 35mm camera to do poster work. Medium format and Large format camera's exist for this reason. Higher grain count's on the film lead to sharper, larger images, just like higher MP camera backs/ccds. Personally, I'm feining for a 20MP foveon back for a decent Mamiya or Pentax MFC.
generally, yes, the higher resolution the better. however, theres also the quality of the lens and the image processing of the camera...
its like saying higher clock speeds are better... you have to factor the architecture, etc
its like saying higher clock speeds are better... you have to factor the architecture, etc
Those are great pictures in the eyes of a photographers, that's art. However, it you carefully look at the pictures, the details are not that great.
My opinion is that if you want great pictures, just take a photography course, then choose a camera later
I would say a picture it 25% the camera and 75% the photographer. You can give someone a 5 MP and they can take the worst pictures. You can give a good photographer a 1 MP camera and he will blow away the 5 MP taken by the other person.
Take a class or practice a lot. That is the beauty behind digital cameras. It doesn't cost all that much to take pictures. Film is a different story.
Take a class or practice a lot. That is the beauty behind digital cameras. It doesn't cost all that much to take pictures. Film is a different story.
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
Well i had HP 612 2 meg and my dad has a HP 735 3meg camera. The HP 612 of mine broke and i bought a Cannon A40 2mp camera.
I printed out a 8x10 with each one. The A40 blows them all away. the 3mp looks good but my A40 looks better.
I havent tried to print anything larger then a 8x10. But i dont really need anything larger.
heh i love my A40 but still trying to learn all the settings.
I printed out a 8x10 with each one. The A40 blows them all away. the 3mp looks good but my A40 looks better.
I havent tried to print anything larger then a 8x10. But i dont really need anything larger.
heh i love my A40 but still trying to learn all the settings.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter