I acknowledge what you are saying, but for those of us that like to make large
prints, and who even resorted to slower, more fine grained film stock back in
the day... 3.2 MP doesn't cut it.
11 X 14 is about the limit you'd want to enlarge a 3.2 MP image to, and even
then, you can see the blocking on high contrast diagonal fine lines.
True, for the average picture taker, the extra resolution of 5 or 6 MP is not
worth the money. -For documenting a restoration, 5 and 6MP would be a waste.
But if you occasionally take your prints up to 22 X 28 and larger, or you
routinely take portions of pictures and enlarge them, you need it.
Dave J.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Ryan
To: davidwjones
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: Re: documenting as-is healey - camera suggestions?
I just wanted to comment on the megapixel (mp) issue. 3.2 is
more then enough. This will give you a very good 11x14 print, I
can't imagine ever going bigger then that. For some reason
marketing has really got people sold on lots of mp's, and there
is no reason for it. 95% of prints are 4x6, and a 5mp won't
make a 4x6 print any better then a 2mp camera (all other things
being equal).
If you find a nice 3.2 with a good macro function that will
easily suffice for what you are doing, and more. One thing to
consider is batteries. I have an Olympus and one of the
deciding factors in my choosing this was the fact it uses 2 AA
batteries, and not a proprietary one. I can get 4 rechargable
batteries and a charger at Radio Shack for ~$25. And in a pinch
I can always just throw regular ones in.
Also, look for a fast recharge time between shots. This is the
most annoying part of digital photography, you have to wait for
some period of time before you can take the next picture. Some
camera's are better than other.
Also, if you plan to travel and take vacation pictures you might
want to invest in a 128 Mb or larger memory card. This is
another reason you don't want unnecessary mp's, the images are
larger and you can't fit as many in the camera.
Try rec.photo.digital for more advice...
Sincerely,
Jim Ryan
)?),
'64 BJ7.
|