![]() |
|
|||||||
| General, Reviews, Tech Talk Share tips & tricks, techniques, general photography chat. |
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Guests
Posts: n/a
|
seems like most people go 'crazy' over high megapixel camera, including myself, just brought a S40.
Sony F707, S40, G2, C4040 etc... but do we really need 4 megapixel? I was told that if you are viewing on your monitor, the highest ultimate resolution you can get is 1280X1024 which any 2 megapixel could do the job. even when printing, 2 megapixel can print 8R easily. I don't think those digital lab generate posters do they? But manufacturer has been feeding us with lots of enlarged fonts like '6 MEGAPIXEL' '5 MEGAPIXEL' whats your view?? |
|
|
#2 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 520
|
Wa u really rich ah, can buy a S40 after ur C2040Z
![]() For me I think 2.1 is enuff. If wanna develop, 4R is the max I will go. Like what I heard one of the poster here say b4 (forgotten who), ur eyes can't possibly see so many megapixels ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Guests
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
| Sponsored Link |
|
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 182
|
Hi,
But I read so many reviews on higher megapixels camera that they are able to capture more details compare to lower megapixels camera. kst. |
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northwest
Posts: 5,042
|
- Does the lens quality do justice to the CCD? - Does the in-camera imafe processing produce the best possible colour? Even if those criterias are met, can the printer and paper you ultimately print on reproduce the resolution that matches the CCD?
__________________
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,333
|
Yes, I agree that megapixels isn't everything. However, I would prefer to have a bigger megapixels as I do have an option to reduce the size when necessary.
What say you guys? |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northwest
Posts: 5,042
|
To add on to this type of discussion, this is how I would generalise all discussions of the nature "Is <some characteristics of the camera> everything?"
Photography is made up of many different components. The ultimate result, which is the quality of the picture taken, depends on the symphony of all the different compoents, how they complement or balance against each other, which is sometimes limited by the equipment, but greatly exposes the capability (or the lack of) of the photographer. On the technical aspect, we ask questions like: Is the focus sharp? Is the exposure correct? Are the colours true to life? Is the shuttle speed and aperture used appropriate? Is the resolution high enough? Is the background gracefully thrown out of focus? etc... On the artistic aspect, we ask questions like: Is the composition and angle good/interesting/unique? Does the picture convey a message/emotion/idea/story? Did it capture a precious moment in time?Does it demonstrate the creativity of the photographer? etc... None of the above can be considered soley while the others are ignored when we appreciate a picture. So when I come across simplistic questions (sorry, no offence to fcpga) like "is the number of megapixel everything?", "is getting close everything in macro photography?", "is the number of X zoom everything?" etc.... my answer is always "NO". fcpga have a very valid point in his post, in my opinion. I just feel that the answer is very obvious. Which ever characteristics you talk about, no single characteristic can be considered "everything" in photography. For that matter, any other form of art/activity. - Is output power everything to amplifier design? - Is horse power everything to a car? - Is CPU speed everything to a computer? .... ....
__________________
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. |
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,333
|
Sorry, this leads to me asking another question, which hopefully you guys can answer.
Supposedly, I have taken a digital phot (say, 2272 x 1704) that turns out to be a little bit soft. Without any post processing in any software, does resizing to 640 x 480 increases its sharpness? |
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northwest
Posts: 5,042
|
Do you value the convenience of higher megapixels over the following: - higher cost of storage to keep the same numer of shots? I know the price is always dropping, but the relation remains contant. - longer write time so you have to wait longer between shots? - in the case the lens quality does not do justice to the CCD, you essentially get higher megapixels with less information. Megapixels don't come free. It is a choice you have to make and justify for yourself.
__________________
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northwest
Posts: 5,042
|
__________________
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Guests
Posts: n/a
|
Lucid explanations roygoh. Like the way you used the word "symphony".
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 625
|
I still think the basic lighting and lens makes up a good pic.
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: River Valley
Posts: 805
|
as for me, i get a higher resolution camera simply becos the move from 3mp->4mp is only $100ish. Like S30 and S40... the different is not really that much. Lower then S30, take a Ixus 300 is another $150ish cheaper.. some might feel paying $100 or 150 more for the extra 1mp is worth it *in case* they want to print big ass photos to hang on the wall
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 13,397
|
As long as the resolution is good enough for reasonably sized prints, it's no longer an important factor. I feel features are more important and that's why I ended up with my current camera which meets my budget.
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northwest
Posts: 5,042
|
__________________
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning and meaningful statements lose precision. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 2,325
|
Take for example one shot medium format camera backs, some of these backs have CCD's with 16 Megapixels and in scanning backs upwards of 120 Megapixel resolutions. In the end however pixel resolution is just part of the package, access to high quality full sized interchangable camera optics is just as important as the pixel count as to capture the maximum detail requires good lenses to start with.
__________________
The Ang Moh from Hell |
|||
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Guests
Posts: n/a
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|