Should I get a 2.1MP or 3.2MP Cam

[apex]

How do you people decide the MP of a Cam before buying?

Does 2.1 and 3.2MP produce a great different in image taken?

I have two cam in mind right now there will be Canon A40 or S30. Mostly taking nite shot and scenery.

I not sure how much I am willing to spend for a digicam. therefore will like to hear from the members here.


My friend have also introduce me Olympus C-730uz (3MP range cam).

Please advice.

 

[MrBig]

Go get the Olympus C730UZ

It has 10X zoom, great for sporting events and scenary shots.

Me just love the zoom and furthermore it's 3MP!

Me gonna get it end of this month. Simply can't wait till pay day.

Yippeee!!! :rbounce:

 

[apex]

Originally posted by MrBig
Go get the Olympus C730UZ

It has 10X zoom, great for sporting events and scenary shots.

Me just love the zoom and furthermore it's 3MP!

Me gonna get it end of this month. Simply can't wait till pay day.

Yippeee!!! :rbounce:

What the market price ah? Did do homework for this brand

 

[MrBig]

I can get it for $780 w/o GST.

 

[apex]

Originally posted by MrBig
I can get it for $780 w/o GST.

Thanks. Sound like price same as Canon or close to it.

But any idea will there a great lost in picture image between a 2 to 3 MP cam?

Thanks new to Dcam.

 

[togu]

It all depends on what size of prints you gonna do, if you think that you are not going to do any printing, 2MP will be good enough for screen display.

But, for the current price of 3MP cam, it's still a good choice to go for it. Just in case you really need to do some bigger prints.

You'll never know...

 

[MrBig]

2MP DC can print out reasonably good quality photos.

 

[apex]

I guess for now. I wouldn't getting the shot to be printed. I just want to keep it for PC viewing.

for a 2.1 MP cam. What is the max size for printing? I know 1.2MP max will be 4R.

What about 2.1?

Thank for all the help.

 

[imaginary_number]

2 MP should be sufficient for A4-sized prints.

If you're definitely sure that you'll never ever want to print pictures larger than A4, then 2 MP should suffice.

Also, you might also be interested to know that usually the higher MP cameras have got more features for you to play around with.

 

[senhwei]

Generally, for PC only viewing, a 2mp camera is more than enough as the highest resolution is 1600x1200 which is far larger than most standard displays of 1024x768.

However, if you want to consider printing your photos out then, 2mp will only get you as far as A4 (max). Even at A4 size, I found that the pixelation is visible.

I've been using a 2.11mp Canon Digital IXUS for the past two years and I rarely print my photos out, hence it has been quite sufficient.

However, an important thing to keep in mind with a higher resolution camera such as a 3mp camera is that it gives you more degrees of freedom to play around with the photo afterwards. By this I mean cropping as this will reduce the effective resolution of your photo. For example, with a 1600x1200 photo (2mp), if you crop 20% out of it, it becomes a 1280x1024 photo (approximately) and this reduces your maximum printable size to be less than A4.

My recommendation is to go for a 3mp camera if the price difference does not break the bank for you.

cheers,

senhwei

 

[pker88]

wat about a 1.2mp cam?
i mostly take pic and store online and
if got the cash will get the canon digicam printer lor
will it be visable the pixel if i print out fomr a canon digicam printer
in a 3r or 4d format?

wat about from those outsdie developing cte?

 

[stk]

1.2mp resolution pics (1280x960) will still be more than good enough for on-screen viewing. You can even send it for 4R development but the outcome will not be as detailed as those from 2.1 or 3mp cameras.

My first digicam was a 1.5mp Fujifilm, followed by a 2.1mp Olympus and now I'm on a 3.3mp Olympus. The difference in 4R quality between a 1.2mp and a 2.1mp source is noticeable in some softness and lack of details. While 4R quality between a 2.1mp and a 3.3mp source is minimal, 3.3mp gives me more flexibility to crop and also to print larger prints without too much compromise in quality (pixelation and softness).

If the prices difference is not too great and it's within budget, go for a higher resolution camera..

 

[pker88]

ehe me cheapo lor
getting a 1.2mp cam and used photoshop to sharpen it and sent for printing ?
possible?
or maybe get the canon digicam printer lor
since it can printer 3r or 4r i tink so
ehhee

 

[Midnight]

Originally posted by pker88
ehe me cheapo lor
getting a 1.2mp cam and used photoshop to sharpen it and sent for printing ? possible? or maybe get the canon digicam printer lor
since it can printer 3r or 4r i tink so
ehhee

If you want the "ideal" of 300ppi resolution for your 4R prints, you will need about two megapixels (1800x1200 pixels, in fact, but 1600x1200 should do the trick). Having said that, though, 1.2 megapixels (1280x960) will still yield about 210ppi for a 4R print, which is still very good. Either one is definitely good enough for most Web/online applications, though. It's your call, so judge your needs based on what you want to achieve.

 

[mpenza]

Originally posted by pker88
ehe me cheapo lor
getting a 1.2mp cam and used photoshop to sharpen it and sent for printing ?
possible?

you can't sharpen a 1.2MP to contain details similar to the 2MP. what's not captured is not there.

 

[senhwei]

From my point view :

1. If printing is the objective, then the more resolution the better (higher pixels per inch when printed)

2. If PC-based viewing is the objective, 2mp is sufficient

3. If web viewing / emailing is the objective, 1mp is sufficient

Let your purpose guide your decision rather than marketing or megapixel count. If you want to manipulate your photos prior to any of the above, then the more resolution the better as this gives you extra degrees of freedom to crop your images and still have a sufficient high resolution image for printing or viewing.


cheers,

senhwei