I have just sold my Canon SI IS and am in the process of selling my Ixus V3. Both are 3.2MP cameras and took great pictures. One of the reasons why I sold them was because of the public perception that 3.2MP just does not cut it. Hence, before I go out to get a new camera, I want to establish what exactly is the min resolution that is acceptable to most people. I will most likely get a higher end camera (the 6MP Canon S3 IS perhaps) and a low end camera that at least meets public perception in terms of pixel resolution (the 4MP Canon A430 perhaps).
I believed and still believe that 3.2MP is more than sufficient for most amateur photographers. My understanding is that the standard for most photo labs is about 300 ppi, and that this is generally regarded as the point of diminishing returns. A 3.2MP camera with 2048 x 1536 pixels will be quite sufficient for a 5R photo of 2100 x 1500 pixels (7" by 5" x 300) and more than sufficient for 4R and below. I believe that a 3.2MP camera can also produce up to A4 size photos of acceptable quality, though if you really want to count pixels, you may need a almost 9MP camera. Is my understanding correct?
Anyway, this market is largely driven by public perception. So, I just want to find out from you guys what is the minimum resolution that you will look for in a camera. Is it 4 or 5MP or more?