English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Megapixels don't seem to do the trick. I have a 5MP Sony that simply produces large images (1280 x 853), but the *quality* of the image is just the same as a 3MP image from an older camera.

I'm considering a CANON EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT (8MP) but only want it if the *quality* of the image improves ... not just the sheer size of the image.

2006-07-03 04:19:48 · 8 answers · asked by mil8 2 in Consumer Electronics Cameras

THANKS FOR THE THOUGHTFUL RESPONSES. Let me clarify the question this way...

If I look at printing primarily 5x7 photographs, will I see a difference between a 3MP image and a 5MP image? Or is it simply an issue with the 'glass' or lens?

I have a sony dsc-t1 which is giving me no love. :)

2006-07-03 07:59:43 · update #1

8 answers

But the number of pixels (or sheer size of the image as you put it) is what increases the quality. If you resized two pictures, one from a 3mp camera and one from a 5mp camera, both to the same size, the 5mp one would be best, because it would be more detailed.

The only other way of improving quality is to make sure you have as high optical zoom as possible so that you don't have to rely on digital zoom which lowers the quality.

2006-07-03 04:23:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Exactly - all pixels are not created equal!

Goto canon's site and download sample images for a 5MP and a 3MP camera, then output them to the same image size.

Only you eyes can tell.

But really you should just get the Rebel and not look back. Invest some money in a good lens and you will be set to enlarge to poster sizes. Even if you don't plan to enlarge beyond a 5x7, you may want to in the future if you take a "money shot"

"dots" per square inch is not equal to "pixels" per square inch with inkjet printers. The printers use multipe dots of different colors to represent a "pixel" - But I know what you mean.

Below is a link to sample images for a canon 3.2MP camera and a 5MP camera. After that, find a great review of the digital rebel by dpreview.com.

2006-07-03 10:04:22 · answer #2 · answered by blinky doodles 4 · 0 0

The more megapixels...the sharper the image.
My 5MP cam takes excellent pics. you might have bought what is called 5MP "interpolated". which is a program within the camera that Boosts a lower megapixel photo to mimic a pic with more MP's. Interpolation is a scam, as you started out with less in the beginning.
I bought my 5MP on ebay new for $125.00. Have had no problems, and it takes Great pics.
Good enough that I have posted many online at amature photo sites. (email me if you want to see them).
The CANON EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT (8MP), is an excellent camera, and I believe that you would be happy with it.
You also might look at buying a good quality photo editing program instead of the free ones out there.
I use an older version of ACDSee, and am about to upgrade.
As far as free ones go, I have a friend who is very happy using Googles free Picassa program.
Good Luck, and enjoy!

2006-07-03 04:48:18 · answer #3 · answered by thearthound 4 · 0 0

Save your money, if you can't tell the difference, most likely no one else will. I am a old time photographer, definition only counts when you are really enlarging a photo, if you don't do this normally don't worry about it. The thing that counts is the "glass", the len quality. Anyhow you would do much better if you worked on photographic composition. If your subject matter isn't interesting who cares if you have a 8 or 5 MP camera??? Get some Cokin Filters (run a web search), open your horizons.

2006-07-03 04:33:24 · answer #4 · answered by Clipper 6 · 0 0

what quality issue are you concerned about? blurring?

a higher pixel count in the image means the image has more detail in it, so at the same display size, you get a richer, more detailed image. think of printing a 5x7 print of a picture - a 6MP image has twice as much image data in it as a 3MP image, so it will be sharper. a camera with a higher pixel count necessarily produces an image with more pixels wide and high than one with a lower count, but it's the net resolution of pixels per inch when you render the image that counts for image quality.

if you're comparing an 8x10 6MP image to a 4x6 3MP image, the 4x6 might look sharper, but that's because you're not comparing apples to apples. look at the images at the same size to compare them accurately.

if you have images that are blurred, then perhaps a camera with image stabilization will help prevent that.

2006-07-03 04:33:29 · answer #5 · answered by noshyuz 4 · 0 0

Mega pixels are what give your pic good quality but the bigger that you try to blow them up the more "grainy" they seem to get. It also could be that if you are printing them yourself versus a photo shop, your choice of paper may be wrong. I found that out the hard way thinking that better paper would be the way to go but my printer is not the greatest for that. So if you are not an aficionado on that stuff, "you learn from your mistakes".

2006-07-03 05:10:00 · answer #6 · answered by melody d 1 · 0 0

Check Consumer Reports and get lots of detailed comparisons.

2006-07-03 04:23:30 · answer #7 · answered by Matt B 3 · 0 0

I AGREE WITH ALL THE PREVIOUS ANSWER THE BETTER THE IMAGE IN THE BETTER YOU WILL GET OUT.HOWEVER BEAR THIS IN MIND MOST INKJETS WILL ONLY PRINT 600DPI 1200DPI OR 2400 DPI AND HIGHER ONES ARE INTERPOLATED DPI

2006-07-03 08:37:42 · answer #8 · answered by ifoodosa 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers