Need help: Looking for best camera with certain criteria

[ht-naimee]

HI all,

I am what you might call a newbie as far as digital cameras are concerned.

I have had a Casio Exilim Z30 which at the time was pretty much the best around IMHO and was really good back then.
Now, well, I need a new one which should hopefully meet the following criterias:

- underwater case must be available
- built in flash as I will need one underwater
- support for at least 1GB, really preferred suport for more (Casio Exilim Z30 supports 1GB cards but is only capable of using around 500MB of it :( )
- RAW format would be nice as I have found that a lot of pictures just don't turn out natural-looking (might of course be the Exilim)
- movies with at least 640x480 @ 30fps
- at least 3x optical zoom
(- 28mm would be nice but really is not a deciding criteria)
- should be small/compact as it is primarily meant for travelling and i must admitt, that carrying around a proper camera bag or any camera that won't fit into the side pockets of my pants (like army or trekking pants, you know what I mean, I hope) is simply a hassle when travelling for longer periods especially if you have a lot of baggage
- a max of around $500 (actual street price)

I tried using the reviews section and looked through a bunch of reviews. But it is always better to ask real people directly after reading reviews and getting a basic idea of what you want and need.

What I have found to be a real proplem with the Casio Exilim Z30 was taking pictures in low light situations. Colors were unnatural and the light in the picture was never the way it really way. Plus most of the time it wouldn't focus properly. And I really tried lots of modes :)
Even in normal light situations indoors, where I was just using a normal ceiling light it sometimes had trouble capturing the right colors and shades.

I would also like a camera where I can simply push down and take the picture without stopping in between to focus.


From the reviews I found that the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 looked pretty much like it had what I needed, but the review suggested that it was incapable of taking sharp and detailed pictures. Given that I like to take makro picture and that underwater I need detail and above-water I also like to take some panorama pictures, I really want sharp and detailed pictures.

RAW format would be great but if it is a must, as the review of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 suggests, then it is a nono. I would like it as a backup and for picture I know I will enlarge as a poster later.

Maybe I should have mentioned this earlier, but I do in fact sometimes like to enlarge a picture to 40x50cm or more.I have sucessfully done this with the Casio Exilim Z30 which is simply a bit blurry and less sharp, but still a good picture and with an Olympus 7MP of a friend (sorry, don't know which one but pretty big).


By the way, should the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 be the best choice, is there a predecessor coming up? It's more than a year old now.
I would need the camera by beginning of December/end o November, so if it is announced sometime this year, I could probably wait a bit.

Thank you all for your help,

Alex

[BiPolarBear]

Do you want a DSLR, a fixed lens or a compact? This (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=20537570) guy got some pretty good underwater shots with a Fuji F30, and I shot this (http://www.jpages.net/images/FIRE_124.JPG) with the Fuji F31fd. Pretty good performer for a compact.

[ht-naimee]

What's the difference between fixed lens and compact? isn't a compact automatically a fixed lens?

the better the camera the better, so DSLR would be nice but is, to my knowledge, always big.

i'm looking more along the line of the before mentioned panasonic, the casio exilim, or your fuji f31. but there is no review on that one.

[BiPolarBear]

Yes, all compacts are fixed lens cameras, but not all fixed lens cameras are compacts. There are some with a pseudo-SLR type body, and many SLR like features, you just can't change lenses. What type did you have in mind? You can get a pretty good pseudo-SLR fixed lens camera for the price range you have in mind. About waterproof cases though, I don't know which ones have it available and which ones don't.

[ht-naimee]

i think it would be a compact then, please.

i take it the panasonic lx2, casio exilim, fuji f31 etc. are considered compacts? if so, yes please :D

[BiPolarBear]

Yes, they are compacts. I have the F 31fd, and you can use that same underwater case that the fellow used in the posts that I linked you to. Here (http://www.jpages.net/images/pics/slideshow.htm?6) are a bunch of shots, although not underwater, that I've taken with that camera. Galleries 6, 7, and 8 are the F31. Galleries prior to that are all with the F11

[ht-naimee]

unfortunately there is no review for the Fuji F31 :(

is there a mutual consent as to which compact is the best?

the panasonic lumix lx2 has all the features i want, but from the review is a useless camera which cannot take proper pictures. so which is the best compact out there?

the fuji?

[tim11]

For lowlight, no flash shot nothing beat Fuji. That's not personal opinion; it's fact and I bought one for this reason. I don't know about under water but for lowlight nothing comes close to it yet.
The Panasonic is good in good light and so are many other cameras.
Click here to see DPREVIEW FUJI F31FD REVIEW (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf31fd/).

F31fd is the same as F30 except it has FACE DETECTION feature.

Click here for DPREVIEW F30 REVIEW (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/).

Click here for DCResource F30 REVIEW (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/fuji/finepix_f30-review/).

Here is a link to photos from average F-series users.
Photos from F10, F11, F20, F30, F31fd (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24706)

[BiPolarBear]

What Tim said. Fuji is hands down the best lowlight performer among compacts. No other camera comes close that I've seen, in that class. I think the f31 is a fine compact. I'm amazed at the detail it's capable of, for a little cam the size of a pack of cigarettes.

[ht-naimee]

sounds intriguing.
however, i see the f31 has "only" 6.3 MP.

i'm aware that MP aren't everything but considering that i will want to enlarge the images to posters of around 40x50cm or possibly more, wouldn't it be better to buy a camera with 10MP and maybe even necessary to buy one with RAW support?

P.S.: Is the F31 already new or can I expect to see a new model, maybe with more MP and possibly even RAW by the end of this year?

[tim11]

A good quality 5MP image can print excellent 14x11" so maybe 6.3MP can give you what you want. Why don't you download a full size sample image from one of the review and print it out just to make sure?
If you must have more MP, though the number of MP doesn't mean everything like you said, do wait till September for Fuji FinePix F50fd. It has IS and humongous MP of 12.

[ht-naimee]

Hi,

Just asked my local retailer and he informed me that the Fuji F31fd is no longer in production and cannot be ordered anymore (I live in Germany, btw).

So will the Fuji F50fd be the direct replacement/successor to the F31fd?

Just saw that the Fuji F50fd will not have RAW either :( :(

Why is it so difficult to add RAW to the format list? I just don't get it

[Rooz]

theres also an f40, but the f50 looks to be an excellent compact.
why do you think you need RAW ?

[tim11]

Not many cameras in your budget now come with RAW. Pana LX2 has RAW but you already cross it off the list.
Yes, F50fd is F30/F31's replacement. F40fd is fully auto. The only thing you can control is WB and a mode that let you control ISO.

[ht-naimee]

Hmmm, this is difficult :(

The Panasonic has EVERYTHING I want from a compact except good picture quality (OK, more zoom would be nice, but hey).

The Fuji is supposed to have the best image quality overall plus by far the best in low light situatiions. At least the F31fd is.
BUT:

- f31fd might have too few MP to make posters off of it
- f50fd has more than enough MP but might lose picture quality...which I still find strange
- f50fd neither has RAW nor does it record high quality video
- the Panasonic has a nice 28mm lens which can prove quite handy, unlike the basic 35mm lens on the fuji

I would have liked RAW for shots I know I will enlarge later or shots (especially underwater) where I know they won't turn out right or which simply I am unable to capture the way I want to.
The higher quality video would be great for filming under water as it can be far more exciting to film a shark or a ray or a dugong than just take stills.

Maybe you can also explain to me, why higher MP usually means lesser picture quality. I don't quite get it. Analogue compacts are no bigger and are able to resolve far more than 12MP with the same lens sizes and the same case sizes.
So why is it so difficult to make a high MP sensor whith low noise reduction? It does seem paradox that a higher MP results in lesser picture quality. It sould really be equal or better quality.

[BiPolarBear]

I wouldn't be too quick to get the F50. Fuji has gotten suckered into the pixel race and has jammed more pixels onto their sensor. The early shots I have seen from a preproduction F50 were quite noisy. A total departure from their usual modus operandi.

[ht-naimee]

not jumping on anything yet ;)

however, I am not sure whether I would be willing to buy a model that is or will soon be out of production.

that would make it pretty difficult to get spare parts or accessories or even just to make sure i get a replacement should i need one (warranty is two years minimum).

have there been any pre-shipping reviews from insiders or people with connections to Fuji?

anywhere I can get some early info and picture on the F50fd?

[BiPolarBear]

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2007/08/02/6765.html
It's in Japanese but you can see the photos. They tested a preproduction model, but the shots are pretty noisy.

[ht-naimee]

OK, even on my 15" notebook screen without zooming into the picture it is pretty obvious that ISO800 is already too noisy to be used.

I really hope this is only due to it being a preproduction unit :(

[BiPolarBear]

Some are hoping so, but I'm not so sure. I think this camera is just like every other compact it's competing with. Too many pixels for the size of the sensor.

They had it perfect with the F31, and its predecessors with 6.3 megapixels and that processor. They've gone a step too far.

But to be fair to them it's a marketing issue. The average compact camera buyer will look at all those megapixels and figure translates into sharper, better photos, when all it translates into is more noise. So all they are doing is trying to compete for the market.

[ht-naimee]

so, can a 12MP picture actually be less sharp compared to a 6MP or will the 12MP be sharper but simply have far more noise?

[BiPolarBear]

so, can a 12MP picture actually be less sharp compared to a 6MP or will the 12MP be sharper but simply have far more noise?

sharpness is really more about the lens(and a number of other factors), than the resolution. I have a 20 inch monitor and I can't even view the shots my F31 takes at full size, and that is the only time when you're seeing 6.3 megapixels. When you reduce a photo in size you're reducing the pixel count. It's no longer 6.3 megapixels.

Having a 12 megapixel camera might be useful if you plan to blow up your photos to poster size, but not for use on the Web or for most size prints.

[ht-naimee]

i want to blow up to poster size (every now and then).

so will 12mp automatically be better or will the noise added by the 12mp camera outweigh the benefit the extra pixels add (twice the pixels after all)

[BiPolarBear]

It depends on the size of the sensor. I have never seen a 12 megapixel compact camera that didn't suffer greatly from noise, even at lower iso's. Now, if you're talking digital SLR's, that's a whole different issue. Larger camera can have a larger sensor, and can accommodate all those megapixels without adding noise.

[ht-naimee]

nahnah, i'm staying compact.

i just checked some of the picture I took on my last trip and from what I can see they were all taken at ISO100. I must admitt, given that I wasn't using my own camera, I simply used the automatic mode. But the pictures were pretty good.

If I kept using ISO100 (will cameras actually automatically swithc to different ISOs?), will the F50fd be a safe bet?

[BiPolarBear]

You can only stay at iso 100 if you have very good lighting (or a stationary subject, and a tripod with very long exposure). If you only plan to use a camera with excellent lighting conditions, then I wouldn't recommend a Fuji. Panasonic, Canon, Olympus, all have better lenses (in my opinion) than Fuji.

The reason to get a Fuji is because of its low light/high iso performance. But so far, not the F50fd. Maybe the F40 would be a good choice, I've never used it or seen a review of it, but I think its performance would be similar to the F31

[ht-naimee]

i would use it with IMHO low light situations. I wouldn't want to manually have to adjust the ISO settings though. Never tried it and I never use a tripod.

so is the fuji only good if i adjust the iso manually or will it automatically take the better picture in low light situations?

[BiPolarBear]

You can set it either way. You can manually select the iso-, or you can set it to auto, and the camera will choose it. You can even set it to auto but set a top end limit, like say 800 or 1600. The camera will still choose the ISO, but it won't go above that limit.

[David Metsky]

Manually adjusting ISO settings (and White Balance) is trivially easy. If you are willing to learn just a little and make those changes you will get significantly better image quality out of any P&S camera. No matter how smart the electronics are on these cameras, you are smarter.

If you want to take really good images in difficult lighting situations you will need to learn about this stuff eventually. Once you do it becomes second nature.

[ht-naimee]

and once i do, buying a camera like the fuji will pay off?

[BiPolarBear]

The great thing about today's little compacts is that they all function very well as point and shoot cameras, but they also allow manual operation, although not to the degree that most full-sized ones do.

Half the shots in that gallery of mine that I linked you to were shot full auto, particularly the shots in Edinburgh Castle. I was walking with a bunch of people, in and out of buildings, constantly changing lighting conditions, and I just didn't have time to continually change settings manually, so I just let the camera do it.

[David Metsky]

and once i do, buying a camera like the fuji will pay off?
All these cameras are good. They will all operate well in Automatic mode; but you can do even better with a few options. I wouldn't worry too much about getting the "perfect" camera, it doesn't exist. Find one that meets your needs, learn how to use it, and don't look back. :)

[BiPolarBear]

Here's (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=24299037) an example of what you can get out of the F30, from another forum.

[ht-naimee]

i guess the most sensible thing to do right now would be to wait and see how the F50fd performs.
If it fails, I will have to see whether the F31fd or the Panasonic LX2 would be better. Picture quality vs. features I guess in the latter case.

So lets hope that the new F50fd will perform as well as the F31fd.

I guess there is no news on a Panasonic release? I would love to see a compact with the features of the LX2 but with decent picture quality.

[BiPolarBear]

Every panny seems to have the same strengths/weaknesses though. They all have fine lenses, do really well in bright light (little to no chromatic aberration) and they're all noisy as heck from ISO 400 on up.

[ht-naimee]

I was wondering:
if the problem with high megapixel cameras is the amount of error diffusion, would the error diffusion be reduced if i reduce the resolution used?
say, if i were to set the fuji f50 to 6MP, would it then be as good with 6MP as the F31fd or would it have the same amount of noise due to error diffusion at any megapixel setting?

Do you know what i mean? if the problem is the high megapixel chip with its high error diffusion, would it be possible to reduce the MPs used and thereby also reducing the noise?

[David Metsky]

Do you know what i mean? if the problem is the high megapixel chip with its high error diffusion, would it be possible to reduce the MPs used and thereby also reducing the noise?

Not really. The image will still be captured the exact same way, then potted down to the resolution you've chosen, so the noise is there from the start. In a smaller image the noise will be less apparent, but you can do the exact same by resizing the image yourself in PhotoShop.

The camera has to use the entire CCD to capture the image since the optics don't change when you change resolutions.

[ht-naimee]

ah, ok. i thought maybe it would intelligent enough to adjust the optics or maybe the useage of the ccd. but yes, that would probably be far more complicated and expensive than implementing better error diffusion :)

so basically, lower resolution just means it will be downsampled and saved at a lower resolution just like when I do so on my computer. good to know.


i just got an email from Fuji informing me, that the F50fd is due end of September and will have an MSRP of 319€. Plus you won't be able to use the zoom while recording video.

Let's wait and see. If only prices would drop on the old models but for some reason the F31fd is only 10€ less than the preorder price of the F50fd :rolleyes:

[BiPolarBear]

You're going to find that the zoom issue is going to be true of most every camera, and almost certainly every compact. They don't allow zoom in movie mode. Cameras that have a manual zoom would allow zoom in movie mode.

[David Metsky]

You're going to find that the zoom issue is going to be true of most every camera, and almost certainly every compact. They don't allow zoom in movie mode. Cameras that have a manual zoom would allow zoom in movie mode.

Although many now allow you to use digital zoom in movie mode. That might suffice.

-dave-

[ht-naimee]

i guess that depends on how the manufacturer implements it.
if it's a 12MP camera and you were to record at 640x480 you could zoom in a few times and still have enough pixels on the chip left to compensate for it. poorly written, but i guess you get the point.

but if of course the camera records at 640x480 and then zooms into this recorded movie, then of course digital zoom becomes utterly useless.

[BiPolarBear]

Although many now allow you to use digital zoom in movie mode. That might suffice.

-dave-

really? I had no idea. That ability was one of many reasons I ordered the S6000fd

[ht-naimee]

just out of curiosity, would be worth looking into something like the canon g9 or nikon 5100? they look fairly small although the images might fool you.

is there something that's marginally bigger than a compact but offers a huge improvement in quality?

[tim11]

If RAW is a must, you should keep an eye on the newly released Nikon Coolpix P5100. It looks like an interesting camera though Nikon hasn't been that strong in the PnS market. However, I don't know about G9 and haven't seen any review yet so I can't really comment much on either G9 and P5100 image quality. You should wait for their reviews.
I just remember now..... there is an independent Canon hack that let you make RAW out of Canon A710IS. I believe David Metsky knows more about it. Apart from that Canon hack I don't think there is any new small PnS that has RAW.

[ht-naimee]

I read the Nikon 5000 review here on dcresource and it seems it didn't perform too well. Picture quality wasn't good.

I was just wondering whether going slightly bigger than very compact (like the SIZE of a Nikon 500, G9 etc) would deliver a significantly better image, especially on high megapixel cameras than the compact models would (e.g. the Fuji F31fd).

[tim11]

Nikon Coolpix P5100 is only very recently. P5000 may not be a stellar performer but that doesn't mean P5100 has to go the same route.
I hope you read about Canon hack on my previous post. That's something you should research more.

[Rooz]

nikon havent made a high quality PnS since the 8700 quite some time ago. i'd personally stay well clear.

[tim11]

nikon havent made a high quality PnS since the 8700 quite some time ago. i'd personally stay well clear.
Yeah Rooz, that's true. I was speaking against my gut feeling. Still, there is nothing to lose by putting a rain check on it.

[ht-naimee]

maybe i shouldn't have mentioned the Nikon :rolleyes:

i was only referring to its size. it is a bit bigger and bulkier than the compacts but not as big as the dSLR or the other bigger cameras.

so is there a benefit of going slightly bigger (Niko 5100, Canon G9-sizes(!) ) than ultra-compact (Fuji F31fd, Panasonic LX2) etc. without going big (Kodak Z812, Nikon D3 -sizes)?

I just selected those models for size comparisons as they are right on the first page.

[Rooz]

for the OP...i think theres a bit of analysis paralysis going on here. there is no perfect camera that will have everything you want. nor is there some secret amazingly brilliant camera that you may discover all of a sudden.

the options are all there, the only thing left to do is pick one.

[tim11]

There aren't any F30 size camera with RAW and there are only a handfull of PnS with RAW; G9 being one and P5100 just add to the list. I'd say get A710IS with Canon hack. I heard it works well with even a battery meter that Canon neglects to put in.

[ht-naimee]

well, it's not that easy because currently I have to chose between the lesser evil:
- low megapixels (bad if you want to make posters) and borderline few features (small zoom, low resolution video, 35mm instead of 28mm, no RAW) with better image quality

against
- ALL the features I want but inferior image quality

Neither seem satisying :(

Maybe if the Fuji F50fd were as good as the F31fd but with a higher resolution and if the RAW hack were applicable to the Fuji camers, I would have found the one for me. But neither seems likely.


EDIT:


There aren't any F30 size camera with RAW
Panasonic LX2 which also has all the other interesting features except for more zoom (which would be OK)

[tim11]

....

Maybe if the Fuji F50fd were as good as the F31fd but with a higher resolution and if the RAW hack were applicable to the Fuji camers, I would have found the one for me. But neither seems likely.
.....
You can rule that out completely.
Why do you think I have more 2 cameras? Maybe 3 cameras comes spring time. It's because none of them fits my purpose and lifestyle all the time.
I'm sure A710 IS's 7MP is good enough for your 40x50 cm posters?
You WILL NOT find a small camera with 28 mm wide, RAW, IS, long zoom and with stellar IQ. You have to compromise for what are most important features and skim down the rest.

[ht-naimee]

OK, lets see:

I want at least 4x optical zoom, it has to be a compact, it has to produce stellar image quality and if possible should in some way be able to take RAW pictures (maybe even more vital if it only has 6MP as with RAW it might be less of a problem to blow up to postr sizes).

Unfortunately I'm not getting a registration confirmation mail from dpreview.com's forum. I would love to find out whether this kind of hack would be programmable for other manufacturers. If so, I guess the Fuji F31fd would move right up to the top of my list, if the F50fd disappoints, as many predict it will.

[David Metsky]

I would love to find out whether this kind of hack would be programmable for other manufacturers. If so, I guess the Fuji F31fd would move right up to the top of my list, if the F50fd disappoints, as many predict it will.
It's not going to happen, you need to accept that.

Seriously, how often are you going to blow something up to poster size? Have you ever done it before? If it's just a idea that you'd like to try some day don't make it something to hold up a purchase.

Just think of all the shots you are missing by not having a camera. :)

[ht-naimee]

Well, I have a Casio Exilim Z30 :)

I have blown up about 10-15 images to posters in the last year. And I would guess that I will add a few more each time I go diving :D

So far I think I could live with the lack of features of the Fuji F31fd compared to the Pana LX2 due to it seemingly having the best PQ.
But the F31fd is no longer available and no stores seem to have them in stock anymore and the last price listed was the same as the brand new F50fd will be. The latter not being important. But not being able to purchase one as it is no longer availabl, is a big BUT. :(

I wouldn't mind waiting for the F50fd but so far nobody believes in it and from the test pictures on the japanese website, it does not look promising.

In the end it will most likely to boil down to: which camera gives the absolute best picture qualiyt, screw the features. But right now, that camera is oop.

[BiPolarBear]

You can probably still get the F. 40, and although I don't own it and haven't tried it, I would bet it performs very much like the F. 31. You aren't going to find raw capability in many compacts.

[Rooz]

Well, I have a Casio Exilim Z30 :)

I have blown up about 10-15 images to posters in the last year. And I would guess that I will add a few more each time I go diving :D.

lol you've printed 10-15 poster sized images from a shitty 3mp compact camera ? paaaaleeeeseee...who are you trying to kid here ? are posters 4x6 on your planet ?

[ht-naimee]

lol you've printed 10-15 poster sized images from a shitty 3mp compact camera ? please. who are you kidding here ? are posters 4x6's on your planet ?
no need for hostility. had you read my earlier posts properly you would have seen that i borrowed two higher MP cameras. The Sony DSC-W7 and the Olympus C7070WZ (accorsding to IExif). I made posters from those. I believe 6 or 7MPs. And even the 30x45cm posters were not quite as sharp as I would have liked. Probably due to a combination of my skills and the cameras resolution and/or sharpness and detail.

[BiPolarBear]

I might be mistaken but aren't the full-size images from a 6.3mp F31 nearly 40" x 30"? That would be a pretty large sized print.

[ht-naimee]

I might be mistaken but aren't the full-size images from a 6.3mp F31 nearly 40" x 30"? That would be a pretty large sized print.

which "full-size" images are you talking about?

[BiPolarBear]

which "full-size" images are you talking about?

Well I've never printed out any shot larger than 8 x 10, but when I open an image shot at finest resolution with the F. 31, in paint shop Pro and view image details, the dimension given in inches is nearly 40" x 30".

[Rooz]

lets not confuse ourselves with what we CAN do as opposed to what is WORTH doing. CAN you print a poster size from a 6mp camera ? sure. will it look very good ? no.

not even sure what you'd do with 10-15 poster sized prints. sorry if i came across as rude but i just dont believe you.

[ht-naimee]

They looked OK, just not a s sharp as I would have liked.

8 of them are in my lab at university, some are here at home, lying around and sometimes I give one or two away for fun. plus I like to swap them around every now and them. keep the lab looking intersting :D

seriously, I made 10-15 posters (i think i ordered 12 last time) from my last diving trip to egypt. none before that but will after the next trip. and the next trips are china and new zealand, so probably some nice pictures to be taken there both above and under water.

it all boils down to me wanting the best picture quality i can get from a compact. whatever that is will have to suffice. not much you can do. but i do want to make sure i get the best compact available and that's why i am here, bothering you guys ;)

so let's not get fixated on posters, it was just to make sure that it is clear, that picture quality is in fact vital and will in fact be blown up to posters every now and then.

[BiPolarBear]

What size are we talking about when we say "poster size"? I never measured a poster.

[ht-naimee]

the last i had made were 30x45cm. but let's say 40x60 as that's the size i am aiming for, next time.

(should equal 17.75x23.62 inches accoring to an online calculator)

[BiPolarBear]

Well according to paint shop, the 6.3mp F31 produces (at highest quality) a shot measuring 2848 x 2136, in pixels, or 39.556 x 29.667 measured in inches. Now as I said I have never printed out anything near that large, but it seems to me that if it looks ok at that size on a monitor (you can only view about 1/4 of it at a time in my 20" monitor) then it should translate ok to print at that same size. Can anyone who has actually tried this comment please?

[David Metsky]

Well according to paint shop, the 6.3mp F31 produces (at highest quality) a shot measuring 2848 x 2136, in pixels, or 39.556 x 29.667 measured in inches. Now as I said I have never printed out anything near that large, but it seems to me that if it looks ok at that size on a monitor (you can only view about 1/4 of it at a time in my 20" monitor) then it should translate ok to print at that same size. Can anyone who has actually tried this comment please?
Sorry, but this means nothing. Monitors display at 72 dpi. For print, you need minimum 200 dpi to look really good, preferably 300 dpi. Image size is a meaningless number in Photoshop without DPI.

[BiPolarBear]

Thanks, that would explain it. So 8x10 is about as large a quality print as you'll get with a 6mp shot?

[Rooz]

i've seen very good prints at 16x20 from a 6mp DSLR; that was really pushing the envelope though. a compact 6mp though ? i don't know if anything over say 11x14 would be very good. it would have to be just about the perfect exposure to get any quality.

MP's only tell part of the story when determining whether an enlargement will be any good.

[ht-naimee]

what are the other parts of the story? :)

megapixels, low noise, what else?

[fionndruinne]

Lens sharpness/quality and a proper shutter speed are a couple more things.

It seems to me you're seriously expecting too much from a compact camera. You can't have your cake and eat it; a DSLR gives you superior image quality (and features like raw) at the cost of size, while a compact gives you superior size/compactness at the cost of image quality. It's that simple, really; there's nothing out there which can somehow marry both the best points.

[Rooz]

Lens sharpness/quality and a proper shutter speed are a couple more things.

add iso, colour, contrast, lighting and most importantly of all how well exposed the image is.