Do megapixels really matter?

[WildAboutAnimals]

I am in the market to purchase a new point and shoot digital camera. On another forum I asked some people to help me choose one with some specific things that I am looking for. One of these things was at least 6 megapixels. Well, most of the replys I got was why do I need 6 megapixels and that all I need is 4 megapixels. They said that megapixels is just a hype and you really don't need that many (5 or more). People got kind of upset about it. I guess that I am confused. The camera that I am looking into was the Canon A620 with 7 megapixels. I was always in the frame of mind that you got better print quality with more megapixels. Do megapixels really matter? I am so confused :confused: Can someone please explain it to me?

Thanks :D
Jennifer

[ktixx]

Well there is a reason for more MP, which is proven by professional companies like Hassleblad creating $30+k, 20+MP cameras. There are 2 reasons for more MP, 1.VERY Large, High quality prints. 2.Significant cropping abilities with minimal loss in quality. The reason why so many people get riled up about mega pixels is because camera manufacturers are in a mega pixel war and every under-educated consumer thinks the more MP the better (no offense :)) which is not exactly true. The reality is, with point and shoots, because of the small size, the more MP = more noise. Basically, for P&S if you don't have a need for VERY Large prints and you don't want to crop significantly, then the more MP is bad because it increases the noise. To break it down into more usable terms...a 2mp camera is more than enough to print clear 4x6 and 5x7's. If you want to print 8x10 or slightly larger consider a 4mp camera, anything significantly larger than this consider a 6,7 or 8mp camera.
Hope this is of some help.
Ken

[cdifoto]

Ken covered it pretty well. I want to add a little by saying that in the digital SLR (interchangeable lenses) and medium/large format world, more MP IS better because they have larger sensors and technology to combat noise. So once you get up in that realm, yeah it's good to have more. You don't need more just for the sake of having more in a point and shoot camera. It can be a bad thing actually because of that noise. A huge picture is worthless if you can't tell what it is of due to noise or softness (a whole new topic altogether).

[Tuesday]

I just wanted to say Thank You for the information on MP. It's just one more thing for me to consider in my purchase.
Tues (who is now leaning towards the Panasonic FZ20)

[bascom]

How about the Canon A610 instead of A620? It's 5mp instead of 7mp.

[George Riehm]

How about the Canon A610 instead of A620? It's 5mp instead of 7mp.

Unless you print 11 x 14 and above the A610 should work fine. Even at larger print sizes the difference of 2MP is barely visible.

To prove this to yourself, shoot several pictures with both cameras (using your own memory card). Take them down to the local kiosk, and print a few. I doubt you will see any difference in resolution.;)

[Severin]

Unless you think you are a professional photographer and are making large prints. I would look at size, features, price, camera and picture quality before megapixils.

[cdifoto]

Unless you think you are a professional photographer and are making large prints. I would look at size, features, price, camera and picture quality before megapixils.

I wouldn't be looking at a point and shoot either. As a professional you're now in the dSLR arena.

[ktixx]

I agree with the above posts. The differene between the a610 and a620 is 2MP, but that 2MP is crammed on to the same size sensor. For the average user a 5mp camera is more than sufficient. You will be able to print large photos (over 8x10) and you will have less noise at higher ISO's with the a610.
Ken

[wxcloud9xw]

I like the added detail of 8mp+ over 6mp and lower in 8x10 prints and larger. The more megapixels can bring out more detail in close-up portraits, or whatever your shooting. I also like to have plenty of room to crop when I need to.