How many megapixels does one REALLY need? 5? More? Less?
05-31-2002, 10:42 AM
#6
AudiWorld Expert
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 29,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consider this: A good quality color slide positive (film) is about 20 megapixels >>>
While film (positive or negative) does not actually HAVE a pixel structure, it does have a grain structure. Higher ISO ratings (larger numbers) usually mean more grain. This grain in film does limit resolution.
For all intensive purposes, a 5 MP camera is pretty darned good. But it really comes down to what you're going to do with it. How will you print them? Etc...
For all intensive purposes, a 5 MP camera is pretty darned good. But it really comes down to what you're going to do with it. How will you print them? Etc...
Trending Topics
05-31-2002, 10:45 AM
#8
AudiWorld Expert
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 29,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No expert, but it's not a linear relationship >>>
Film grain is very different from pixel structure in that it's not rows and columns of squares. It's emulsion on film. Smaller grain means higher resolution, but generally also means it's less sensitive to light (lower ISO.)
To see grain on film, take a 35mm negative and blow it up to 16x20... you'll see it. I promise.
Also, <a href="http://www.howstuffworks.com/film.htm">How film works</A> might be a good read to help understand the correlation
To see grain on film, take a 35mm negative and blow it up to 16x20... you'll see it. I promise.
Also, <a href="http://www.howstuffworks.com/film.htm">How film works</A> might be a good read to help understand the correlation
05-31-2002, 10:47 AM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I researched, anything over 4 is overkill for "normal" photogaphy
Now if you plan on printing posters, thats a different story.
I dont think you would see a difference between 3 and 4 MP on a 4x6. An 8x10, yes, but slight.
I saved $150 by going with a 3.2MP and just bought a 256mb card for $112. I would get more use out of that the the added MP.
I dont think you would see a difference between 3 and 4 MP on a 4x6. An 8x10, yes, but slight.
I saved $150 by going with a 3.2MP and just bought a 256mb card for $112. I would get more use out of that the the added MP.
05-31-2002, 10:48 AM
#10
Elder Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 13,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
put it this way - I've shot a lot of print and slide film - for recreation and profit and prefer
medium format... I just want digital, b/c I feel like I should futz around with it a bit, but I don't want to invest sh!tload as I know I'd rather put my money into real gear, but I also don't want a POS disposable digital camera. Something with the approximate function/feel of a SLR - pref. under $1,500.
I only ask about megapixels b/c they seem to singlehandedly drive prices more than any other variable.
TIA! - rt
I only ask about megapixels b/c they seem to singlehandedly drive prices more than any other variable.
TIA! - rt