Is 3.2 mega pixel enough for nonprofessional photography?

Answer 1

Absolutely, but please be sure to compose your picture as carefully as possible. In other words, don't grab a shot and figure that you will be able to "save" it by cropping and enlarging. 3.2 is plenty for average use, but 4 and 5 MP are so commonly available for pretty much the same price, I'd consider looking into getting a camera with slightly more than 3.2 MP. If you've got a great deal all lined up, don't let the "low" 3.2 stop you.

Here are some 3 MP pictures:

3 MP http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/band2.jpg
3 MP http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/safforcd.jpg
3 MP http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/sarahferrari.jpg

Here are some 4 MP pictures, just to see if ytou see any difference, which you won't really. They have been editted down in size somewhat, so they are all probably similar to 3 MP images.


500KB - http://members.aol.com/swf08302/benfranklin.jpg
Supported on a metal fence for about a 3 second exposure
The camera was in "auto" mode and I just held it still.

1.7 MB - http://members.aol.com/swf08302/commsthouse.jpg
Just a grab shot of a particular house

2MB - http://members.aol.com/swf08302/sunset20060214.jpg
Pretty winter sunset

38KB - http://members.aol.com/swf08302/solstice20051221.jpg
That's Venus up in the sky

Answer 2

MP is not the only benchmark. 3.2 is more than enough for data capture but on a camera phone is next to useless for photography. 3.2 on a compact camera is pretty good but no where near enough for a DSLR. The underlying thing is the lens quality you could have 10MP but if you shooting through a rubbish lens the picture will always be dire even non-professionally

Answer 3

I would not recommend a camera with less than 6 megapixels these days.
You can certainly tell the quality difference of 6MP photo compared to a 3.2MP photo.

If you are concerned about file size on a 6MP camera...just select the next size down for a slightly smaller file. (but at least you know you have more megapixels if you every need it...great for editing or cropping).

Answer 4

3.2 mega pixel is great if you want to get strong deatailed pictures i would get a 5 or 6 mega pixel. but if you just want to see people's faces and not all the deatials i would get 3.2 mega pixels or 3 mega pixels.
( hope this helps email me at [e-mail] )

Answer 5

A 3.2 will make good 4x6 or 5x7 pictures if you do not zoom or crop much off them. Most people are fine with this. However, if you are wanting to make larger pictures like 8x10's or bigger you will want higher resolution.

Answer 6

It's good enough for a 4 x 6 print, but you would probably want something a little better though.

Answer 7

It depends on the quality of the camarea and what your expectations are, i would recomendo something like 5 to 7 megapixels.

Answer 8

You might be happy with it for a short period of time but as soon as you get a little more experience you won't be happy with it anymore. Especially if you like to cut a small portion of your picture and blow it up.

Answer 9

straight:
professional photographer = you get paid for what you doing ...even if is bad quality.
So ... you can do fantastic photos...never get paid ..so you not a "pro".

... IMHO: minimum paper size to see the quality of a photo is 8x10".
for that you need at least 6 Megapixels.

Answer 10

3.2 is ok I think 5 should be the minimum