Megapixel wars?

[Rex914]

Not to rain in on the flood of new cameras, but I have to say that I'm pretty disappointed so far at what's been announced. It looks like the megapixel wars are here to stay. Every manufacturer except for one has announced a compact 3x zoom 6/7 megapixel model or something along those lines. What does this prove? The consumers lose out and get suckered into buying a higher megapixel model instead of a lower one that actually takes BETTER pictures and has better features. What do you think?

[Duke]

I agree. A lot of the time with my A75 I am taking photos of buildings at 640x480 to post on an internet skyscraper forum. I've got much more need for extra optical zoom than for extra megapixels. I'm sure that the majority of pictures taken never get out of the electronic medium so what is the need for 7MP?

[dwig]

yeah, but my car has more horespower than yours ...


... Just as hp is not a measure of the usability or even performance of a vehicle, an increase in MP will not automatically make better pictures. There is value in having more resolution than you need. Quality holds up better when you edit if you edit at a higher than final resolution and downsample as a last step.

IMHO, the race is quite justified up through 4-5mp. Going to 7-8mp for advanced users seems justifiable, but most average users will never gain from such increased resolution and will only be burdened by the larger data files.

[print-digital]

I agree as well, just because I have a Pentium 4 and yours has Pentium 3, it does not mean that my PC will be any better than yours in the long run - it could fall down in several other areas such as memory or storage space.

An increase in MP alone will not make a great camera, it needs to have a host of other features to complement the large increase! Its just a question of educating the general public who at the end of the day drive demand for these megapixel monsters with out knowing the reason why.

[Rhys]

Most people would be happy with a 1.3mp image as most never print to more than 6x4. I've seen people nipping into Boots with their digital camera, popping the card into Boots machine, printing all their photos and then formatting the card. And they have the latest 6 megapixel camera. All they're doing is 6x4s!

It's very much a case of advertisers convincing people they need more than they really do.

I standardised on 3 megapixels. 3 will do me an A4 print very nicely; an A3 at a pinch. In fact, I might just take a memory card with a nice photo to Staples to have it printed to A3 or bigger just to see what the difference is.

[Digideb]

I'm surprised at how many digicam users don't print pix. That's my favorite thing to do & I find 2- 5x7s fit nicely on one page when I use my "Photo Wizard" for printing.
Although my little Olympus has 6 MPs I didn't choose it for that reason. I had already read that's not a good reason to select a camera. I chose my camera mainly for size, sturdiness & outdoor shots, especially super macro. The C-60 had the best macro capabilities of all compacts (I could afford) & I've been able to make some nice prints. I also like to email pix, but achieving a nice quality print is the ultimate result for me.
Only problem now is, I'm lusting after the new, nicer printers!

[Rhys]

I'm surprised at how many digicam users don't print pix. That's my favorite thing to do & I find 2- 5x7s fit nicely on one page when I use my "Photo Wizard" for printing.
Although my little Olympus has 6 MPs I didn't choose it for that reason. I had already read that's not a good reason to select a camera. I chose my camera mainly for size, sturdiness & outdoor shots, especially super macro. The C-60 had the best macro capabilities of all compacts (I could afford) & I've been able to make some nice prints. I also like to email pix, but achieving a nice quality print is the ultimate result for me.
Only problem now is, I'm lusting after the new, nicer printers!

Many 35mm photographers never printed their photos - they did transparancies instead, which they'd then project at slide shows.

I don't print many pictures. I don't see why I should waste storage space on paper prints (which are expensive) when I can view them on my PC and can even email them to friends.

[Digideb]

I guess I must be an oddball in digicam world. As an average camera user, I wasted so much film & developing costs getting snapshots the "old fashioned way"(with lots of "duds"), it's a thrill to select & print a desired image all on my own.
As hard as it is to believe, I actually still have friends & family that don't have a computer. Even my online friends have been so impressed with my "glossies" I've "snail mailed" them, that they consider them suitable for framing. (despite my objections)
In fact, it was the direct connection from taking the picture to the final print that really sparked my interest in digital photography.

[Rhys]

I guess I must be an oddball in digicam world. As an average camera user, I wasted so much film & developing costs getting snapshots the "old fashioned way"(with lots of "duds"), it's a thrill to select & print a desired image all on my own.
As hard as it is to believe, I actually still have friends & family that don't have a computer. Even my online friends have been so impressed with my "glossies" I've "snail mailed" them, that they consider them suitable for framing. (despite my objections)
In fact, it was the direct connection from taking the picture to the final print that really sparked my interest in digital photography.

Yes. You prune out from the photos you take, those that you really want to print. I take the process a stage further - I print out only the really spectacular photos. The rest are simply saved on disk.

I used to do all my own D&P with colour, black and white, infrared and slide films. I find the advantage with digital is in not having to use chemicals and the fact it's an instant medium.

[EAP]

I don't print photos much any more at all. I have my computer set to use a certain photo file as my screensaver. I put my favorite pictures in that file, especially at work. I love it when, during meetings in my office, people get totally distracted by the photos cycling through on my screensaver. Or I'll be doing paperwork and look up to see a favorite photo on my computer screen. I get to briefly daydream about where I was when the picture was taken. I also like to email photos to friends, and just joined an online hosting service (smugmug.com). I agree that megapixels are overrated for those of us who are not experts. I'd MUCH rather see a 3-5 MP camera with more than 4x optical zoom, rather than a 7 MP camera with only 3x optical zoom.