Please explain camera megapixel resolution to me...

rnmcd

Platinum Member
May 2, 2000
2,507
0
0
Given all other things being equal is the only difference between a camera with a two(2) megapixel resolution and a camera with a five(5) megapixel resolution is that the higher megapixel will produce larger photos?

More pixels don't make a better photograph at a smaller image size...or does it. In other words a 2 megapixel cameras photo printed at 5"x7" will produce the same photo as a 5 megapixel camera's photo printed at 5"x7"?

 

d33pt

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2001
5,654
1
81
the more megapixels the bigger you can print the photo and have it look nice...
 

csiro

Golden Member
May 31, 2001
1,261
0
0

More megapixels will give you a better picture up to a certain point. The larger the photo the better the print, if u have more pixels to work with. For 4x6, I think 2mp is sufficient though. Also with more MP, u can do more post-editing like cropping and zooming without losing out on detail.
 

DBL

Platinum Member
Mar 23, 2001
2,637
0
0
depends on the output device. A true 300dpi (not an inkjet) output would require 1500 (300*5) x2100 (300*7) pixels to maximize details. So, you would not see a benefit in a 5x7 over 3.15 mpixels.

Then there is the consideration of how the camera created those 2,3 or 5 mega pixels. Not all cameras are created equal. You may also want the extra pixels for cropping situations.
 

JoeBaD

Banned
May 24, 2000
822
0
0
One of the great advantages of a higher rez camera is that you can enlarge and crop your photos without losing clarity.
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
Originally posted by: glen
Pictures made with a less than 2 megapixel camera then turned to jpegs:
link

I'm not a photographic specialist, but that looks pretty good. Is something wrong that I'm missing?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: glen
Pictures made with a less than 2 megapixel camera then turned to jpegs:
link

I'm not a photographic specialist, but that looks pretty good. Is something wrong that I'm missing?

not really, but theres 2 reasons for that
1) these aren't very large shots
2) looks like someone who really knows how to pick a shot was taking them
 

TommyVercetti

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2003
7,623
1
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: ViRGE

2) looks like someone who really knows how to pick a shot was taking them

A person who knows how to pick a shot can make any shot look good, may it be a 10 MP digicam or a cheap disposable camera. There is this one photographer who photographs models for the SI:Swimsuit edition and all he uses is a cheap disposable camera. His real magic is in picking the shot and the lighting. Boggles your mind when you see his shots, you just cannot tell that it was taken with a cheap camera.

About the digicam MPs, 2 MP is just good enough if you wanna get prints made. 3 MPs if you want larger prints.
 

iamme

Lifer
Jul 21, 2001
21,058
3
0
i had a 2.1MP Kodak and it printed ok 8x10's. I now have a 3.34MP Olympus and the 8x10's look alot nicer.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
screen res = 72dpi.

printout res = ~300dpi


so looking half decent on your screen isn't enough really.

2mpix is minimum. that being said, not all sensors/cameras are equal, you cant' go by mpix alone. dpreview.com and steves digi cams sites are good places to start. happy hunting.


since your a newbie, get a s200 canon. pocket sized, and full featured 2mpix and relatvely cheap. nice to have a camera on u:)
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
not to mention with higher res camera u have more cropping options. if you want to crop a photo really close, u can with high res and still have decent res left over. low res.. u can'tcrop worth jack