kenrockwell.com— This is a great article that explains why a 5 megapixel camera isn't necessarily better than a 3 Megapixel camera.
Aug 2, 2006View in Crawl 4
"Medium format" film is 6x6cm or 6x4.5cm, a 4x5" print is much bigger, actually a "Large Format," although large format cameras can go up to 8x10" film size...Back to the original topic, I worked for a while as a photographer during college, and we had the 6mp Canon 10D, which was a great camera... Granted we had expensive lenses, but I was able to get some great shots with it... The difference between the sensor size definately does make a difference in sharpness, if you can afford a better camera and lenses... There is noise when you get up to 800 or 1600 ISO (could be better now, the 10D is 3 years old at this point) but then again, color film at 800 or 1600 is fairly grainy...
All i know is that my 8 megapixel looks better blown up than my 3...Now, mind you, i said blown up. So, at smaller sizes, the difference gets more and more unrecognizable.
I was under the impression there was much more to a camera than just the MP rating. What about lens and CCD or CMOS?I've got a Lumix LX1 (Did my research via dpreviw.com) It is a Leica DLUX 2 in a Lumix body.It rocks the Casbah!!!The shareef dont like itRockin the casbahRock the casbah
"photo" quality is 300 dpiNoone is going to look at a 24x36" image close enough to see the pixels. What DPI do you think 30 foot billboards are printed at?
<a class="user" href="http://photo.net/">http://photo.net/</a> is another good site (if a little hard to navigate). Lots of discussions and whatnot on there as well.I was in your same boat - have and love my A40 (it still takes bettter pictures than many of my friends' 5MP models). I ended up with the Canon 30D so I could keep my lenses and thats a fantastic camera. If you're still in the canon market I'd recommend that or the 20D (which is essentially the same but cheaper and is now getting some nice markdowns in stores to make way for the 30).
FTA: "For instance, for an excellent 8x10 you need [8" x 300 DPI] x [10 x 300DPI] or 2,400 x 3,000 pixels, or 7,200,000 pixels, or 7.2 megapixels."Even though megapixels are not the end all, be all of factors for quality. Megapixels are part of the equation. Lenses and CCDs are equally important. But if you have a Canon Rebel that is 6.2MP and a new Canon Rebel that is 8.0MP, then when you print an 8"x10" picture, you will notice it being more film-like, and less grainy.
Yeah, how is that Pentium 75 working out for you? If you believe the old megahertz myth I'm laughing my ass off. You keep your old pentium and I'll stick with my quad-core. Turn down your 8-track tape and pay attention.
Closed AccountAug 3, 2006
"Medium format" film is 6x6cm or 6x4.5cm, a 4x5" print is much bigger, actually a "Large Format," although large format cameras can go up to 8x10" film size...Back to the original topic, I worked for a while as a photographer during college, and we had the 6mp Canon 10D, which was a great camera... Granted we had expensive lenses, but I was able to get some great shots with it... The difference between the sensor size definately does make a difference in sharpness, if you can afford a better camera and lenses... There is noise when you get up to 800 or 1600 ISO (could be better now, the 10D is 3 years old at this point) but then again, color film at 800 or 1600 is fairly grainy...
burgerboy06Aug 3, 2006
All i know is that my 8 megapixel looks better blown up than my 3...Now, mind you, i said blown up. So, at smaller sizes, the difference gets more and more unrecognizable.
thujoneAug 3, 2006
And most importantly less noise.
jmack111Aug 3, 2006
I was under the impression there was much more to a camera than just the MP rating. What about lens and CCD or CMOS?I've got a Lumix LX1 (Did my research via dpreviw.com) It is a Leica DLUX 2 in a Lumix body.It rocks the Casbah!!!The shareef dont like itRockin the casbahRock the casbah
cresquinAug 3, 2006
"photo" quality is 300 dpiNoone is going to look at a 24x36" image close enough to see the pixels. What DPI do you think 30 foot billboards are printed at?
coffeedemonAug 3, 2006
<a class="user" href="http://photo.net/">http://photo.net/</a> is another good site (if a little hard to navigate). Lots of discussions and whatnot on there as well.I was in your same boat - have and love my A40 (it still takes bettter pictures than many of my friends' 5MP models). I ended up with the Canon 30D so I could keep my lenses and thats a fantastic camera. If you're still in the canon market I'd recommend that or the 20D (which is essentially the same but cheaper and is now getting some nice markdowns in stores to make way for the 30).
joehobbesAug 3, 2006
Awesome -- well-written (but a bit of a ramble...)
malhtiekAug 4, 2006
FTA: "For instance, for an excellent 8x10 you need [8" x 300 DPI] x [10 x 300DPI] or 2,400 x 3,000 pixels, or 7,200,000 pixels, or 7.2 megapixels."Even though megapixels are not the end all, be all of factors for quality. Megapixels are part of the equation. Lenses and CCDs are equally important. But if you have a Canon Rebel that is 6.2MP and a new Canon Rebel that is 8.0MP, then when you print an 8"x10" picture, you will notice it being more film-like, and less grainy.
dh2kAug 4, 2006
Megapixel is just a measure in digits. For a good shot first you need good eyes and moments.
rktlrejaDec 22, 2007
<a class="user" href="http://www.diet-article.com">http://www.diet-article.com</a>________________________________________________
enzomediciMay 20, 2008
Yeah, how is that Pentium 75 working out for you? If you believe the old megahertz myth I'm laughing my ass off. You keep your old pentium and I'll stick with my quad-core. Turn down your 8-track tape and pay attention.