|
|
| *SoulEyes Photography>>>Best Digital Camera |
Megapixels in a digital camera? |
I want to get a digital camera what would be the best megapixals for a good picture? the higher the better i think the best on the market has 10.2megapixels you can get a great picture with something as low as 4 or 5. You can get them up to 12 I do believe, but for what I do, it doesnt justify the extra cost. As much as possible.... At least 5. HP makes an 8 megapixel for about $308. I saw a camera that takes 10 megapixels, it's clearer than real life, and my photographer has a 24 megapixel!. Average these days is 5 or 6. I've taken great picts in the old days with a 2 megapixel. Depends on how big you want to blow it up. it depends like if you want to be able to do blow ups of your pictures or just keep them at the size you take them..if you want to do 8 x 10 you probably would need a 5 megapixel camera but if not, you can go with a smaller megapixel You dont need a 10 megapixal camera unless you are planning on doing huge blow ups The more megapixels the better the quality of the piucture - not necessarily a better picture! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I have a cannon with mega pixel 2.0 it is the best camera ever, everyone says upgrade for a newer model ?? why does the trick fantastic pictures..... would not go below 2 though. It's not just about pixels but also the processor, a good quality 5 mp camera could take clearer pictures than a lower quality with more pixels. Megapixels are meaningless if the optics are garbage. Look at reviews and decide what suits your purpose. depending on what you are taking photos of. my camera is 5.1 or 5.2 and takes very good pics, i took some amateur photos at a wedding and compared to the professional ones there isn't much difference between quality. basically it's the number of pixels (in thousands) in an image, so the more the better. For a digital camera that's equivalent to the better 35mm film cameras I'd go for something with at least 5-6 megapixels. If you're really interested in zooming into them, or want something mroe than wedding and holiday snaps, then go higher (and pay more) if it's for ordinary pictures between 3 or 4 megapixals would do and wouldn't cost an arm or a leg to buy one. anything in the 10 megapixels region in my opinion is really for the professional photographers. who want absolute top quality images above anything else. and are prepared to pay megabucks for it. I've got a 2.1 and have blown pictures up to 8x10 with excellent quality, depends what you are hoping to use it for really. If you want a super compact you'll take everywhere go for a Cannon Digital Ixus 60 or 65, brilliant picture quality, fast operation, pocket sized and all for about 拢200. If you are in America I think it's called the SD600 or something like that. The difference that megapixels make are in the size of the biggest pictures you want. I think a lot of people already said the obvious things... Image quality is determined by the quality of the lens. Megapixels just limit how big you should print. increase he horizontal lines and vertical lnes while designing If you are to view on the monitor screen, it hardly matters, but if you are to have prints, then it depends on size of print. If you are going to have the usual 6"x4" prints, save money on pixels, as there is no advantage to bigger resolutions than 2m. 5 mega-pixels will give a resolution appropriate to A4 size prints. This question came up when film cameras were big! The larger the format (neg size) the better the resolution. However; at some point, you are just wasting your money. Same applies here. 4-7 megapixels should be more than enough for the average person, unless you plan printing wall murals. Stick with name brands like Nikon, Canon, Kodak, Sony, Olympus. Digital Cameras are like PCs, next year they are cheaper and better! Dude, quality of a camera is mainly decided by the size of the glass, i.e., the lens. MP is not a big deal as long as it is not 1 MP. You can do a great job with a 3MP as long as you know what you are doing. But the speed of the lens and the focusing system decide how your picture will come out. MP is a small problem. Five megapixels is the maximum amount you will reasonably notice any difference with a standard size shot. Truthfully, I would get good shots (alot better than I ever got with film) a few years ago when I was only using a 3 megapixel camera. Today, I use a 10 megapixel and the photos are about the same, until I start blowing them up. The 3 megapixels look like crap after I blow them up just a little bit. But the 10 megapixels still look phenomenal after I have really blown them up quite a bit. Note that any form of digital zoom merely blows the picture up to make it look magnified. If you are going to use digital zoom, you need alot of megapixels. Optical zoom, doesn't have this problem. As others have said, there are a lot of considerations besides megapixels in choosing a camera. I recommend the site dpreview.com, which has really helpful reviews of many cameras. on my camera which is 5mp, usually shoot in 2mp resolution, i allways print 6x4 and v.rarely crop them. i get ci200 pictures on 5mp and ci420 pictures on 2mp resolution, people make a fuss about mega pixels, the main quality relies on your cameras image processor. 2 things affect the photo quality. The lens itself. And the MBpixels. Megapixels will affect the resolution. For normal 4x5 even a 2mb pixels works okay. Unless you want to blow it up to poster size then maybe go for 5mb and above. In the market nowadays, its 4 mb or more anyway. So i will check out what lens they are using. Carl Zeiss will be best. The cheaper cameras have cheaper lens. |
Photography Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster |