pixels

kerrysgold

I had a 4 mega-pixel camera (which got broken..oops) and it took good quality pictures. i'm planning on buying a new camera..8 mp and 3x optical zoom. is that good, or at least will it mean even better picture quality than my last camera? thanks

elven

You wouldn't be able to see a difference until you start printing at A4(ish) but it will be better - and the zoom will come in pretty handy too.

Oriel

Be careful. Just because the pixel count is higher - doesn't mean that the quality will be better. Quality depends on the lens of the camera, not the amount of pixels it can store!

elven

I slap myself on the wrist...

Although, will a newer model, with higher specs (I'm guessing of course, from the inclusion of an optical zoom) not generally have a better quality lens, and given the technology improvements over time, a better sensor?

And as a matter of interest since I don't know much about this end of things - would the difference in quality of the lens at this sort of range be perceptible in say 5x7 or even A4 prints?

Oriel

elven wrote:

And as a matter of interest since I don't know much about this end of things - would the difference in quality of the lens at this sort of range be perceptible in say 5x7 or even A4 prints?

Oh clearly - If you put a £100 lens and a £1500 lens on the same camera* you'll notice a difference no matter what size you print out at.
Pixels just help the resolution of the print, the good lens is the thing that actually makes up the image.

*hypothecialy - this isn't a DSRL camera we're talking about, but the principle is the same.

halenger

The other problem related to megapixel count with point & shoot or even DSLR is sensor size. Cramming double the amount of pixels into the same sized sensor has a tendancy to lead to more problems (image noise etc).

Read up on the camera you're looking at here: http://www.dpreview.com Read reviews there (if there are any), read ones on the net, look at sample photos etc.

Negative reviews are bound to be there for practically every product. Nothing's perfect, some people will get bad samples etc. Read around a bit to get a mroe general idea and then form your own. Reviews mean little at the end of the day.

melekalikimaka

the lens and the sensor are what what really effect picture quality, pixel count is tripe round 6 mp is the most you'll ever need

elven

I may be stepping into dangerous territory here - but at this sort of range, say €300 at most - how much is the lens/sensor really going to affect the quality? I can obviously see that when you get to DLSR or DLSR 'style' cameras it will be quite an issue, but aren't we talking about a bit of overkill for a compact snapper? Like telling someone who wants a PC for going on the internet that they need a dual processor system, with 2gb corsair memory...?

melekalikimaka

i've noticed that the crappy brand cameras of equal pixel to say a canon , always have crap image quality down to the work put into the lens/sensor, surely you've used some of those aldi/lidl excuses...my god i've never seen such bad pics

elven

Hmm in that case I must have been protected from bad cameras so far... which isn't such a bad thing.

artieanna

The pixels is to do with the quality of the image in print and its size, for example I have a fuji finepix 2.0 megapixel and it prints A4 perfect quality prints. So if you are printing larger than this size you need to up the pixels.

I would be more concerned with the 3x zoom its not a very good range mine has 6x zoom and, I'm disappointed with this at times.

I use my camera for general use and for amateur photography and my advice is buy a camera that you will be happy with and a good zoom lens is essential. buy a reliable brand too not cheap sh**......

kerrysgold

the camera i am considering now is a vivitar V4345. 3x optical zoom, 4.0mp. its only €110.00 from argos. i liked the last camera i had, the picture quality was v. good i think..it was a vivitar 4100. here is a picture i took with it: