Newbie question - Difference between 2meg and 3Meg cameras ?

OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???

" wrote:

OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???

It's more what you can do with the images afterwards. The good thing
about smaller file sizes is, of course, the ability to cram tons of
shots on one card. I have a two and a three meg cam, I can see the
difference in the images, enough so I can check out detail more easily
on the 3mb one, plus editing them down, trimming anything unwanted
from the edge of a quick shot, say, will still leave you with a usable
file size on the bigger one.


--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

wrote:
OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???

There are some who say that at least 200 pixels per inch of print is
desirable, so that would mean at least (5 x 200) x (7 x 200) = 1.4MP.
Others say 300 pixels per inch, so that would mean 3MP. Allowing a
little for cropping, would suggest at least 3MP.

I have seen A4 prints (210 x 297mm) from a Nikon 990 camera (just over
3MP) and they were fine. Providing it's sharp and well exposed, the
content of the print matters far more than the number of megapixels.

David

wrote in message
ups.com...
OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???

All else being the same, both the 2 or 3 mp camera is fine for 4x6 prints.
For 5x7 both will work but you start to stretch 2 mp a bit.

A simple check is divide the number of horizontal pixels in the image by the
length of the print (horizontal is used because vertical is often cropped to
fit the print). the result should be in the 250-300 range. For example, a
2mp camera may have 1600 pixels horizontally. 1600/7=229 (using a 5x7
print). 229 is okay, but may look a bit soft to some. A 3 mp camera will do
286, which should be fine.

This basic check should be weighted as prints get larger because viewing
distance increases. A 11x14 print should be fine for viewing in the 200 -250
range.
-S

On Feb 12, 4:56 am, "
wrote:
OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???

This depends a lot on the subject. Some scenes with a lot of fine
detail will, even in a 4 x 6 show better results with 3 than 2. I
would recommend a 3Mp camera as the minimum acceptable even for
snapshots.

Of course, the thing is, you can never predict the future. Your
intent now may be nothing serious, but you never know when you will
come across an object, scene, or new interest when you really will
want an 8 x 10 blowup :-) Even 5-6 Mp cameras today aren't that
expensive.

On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 02:56:12 -0800, wrote:

OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???

The most demanding limit I've seen is 300dpi for 'photographic' quality.
300x4x300x6 = 2,160,000. 2MP should be more that sufficient. I've had
excellent results printing 1MP (1152x864) on 8x10.

wrote:
OK. Apart from the obivous that one an take pictures with 3Mb
pixels.....

In terms of just using this camera for snapshots, nothing serious,
getting them printed out at 4x6 or 5x7 format....

Would you see a difference in the higher resolution shots on this
size? I'm sure I heard somewhere that anything higher than 2Meg is
unnoticeable on this size, and is only really useful for larger
sizes ???


The quick answer is no, provided you are talking about utilizing the
whole shot. However, (there always is a however), it being a fact of
life that you would be hard put to find a new camera capable of showing
any differences if there were any (i.e. decent lens etc.), your question
at this point is more academic than practical. By the time you read this
even 3mb cameras will be gone. Of course, if you are talking used that's
a different matter. My old A40 canon took great shots at 2mp.
Dave Cohen

Thanks for the help everyone....