is 3.2 megapixels good?

Question

i was looking at a digicam on the net and wondered if 3.2 megapixels was any good, anyone have an idea?

Answer 1

It's fine for e-mail and MySpace. It's probably okay if you never plan to print more than 6x4 inches usingthe full frame without any cropping.

I happen to have some photos from old auctions on an FTP site. I think that these were all taken with a 3 MP Nikon Coolpix 885.

http://members.aol.com/swf08302/carvina.jpg
http://members.aol.com/swf08302/konkontu.jpg
http://members.aol.com/swf08302/skullfront.jpg

Here are some snapshots with the same 3 MP camera. If you wanted to do some serious editting, there's not very much to work with.

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


There are so many 4 and 5 MP cameras out there at reasonable prices, it might actually be easier to find one of them.

I think the best deal of the season is the Canon Powershot A530. It has been on sale at numberous big box stores below $130. That's a good price on a good camera. The A530 was selling for $180 not too long ago. I've recommended this camera within my own family, so I'll be living with the results of this recommendation right along with you. You can use the rest of your budget to buy a decent memory card.

Go here and read an extensive review:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/a530.html

Skip to this page if you just want the final word:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/a530_pg6.html

Check the sample images, too.

This will blow your mind:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

If you find a little more in the budget...

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/a540.html

Answer 2

You should be able to take decent 4 by 6 inch pictures with it, and make 8 by 10 inch prints with it if you don't do much cropping.

Anymore, 3.2 megapixels is obsolete. Unless the camera has a 10 times optical zoom or other extreme feature, you shouln't pay more than $90 for a 3.2 megapixel camera.

Answer 3

3.2 megapixels can give you absolutely fine images, if the camera is a good one. That means:
- you must have the possibility to switch between various sizes and resolutions.
- The camera should have a big optical zoom. Don't let yourself be fooled by impressive figures of digitel zoom, that's trash.
With a camera like this you can take fine normal size photos or SMALL enlargements. For bigger enlargements of good quality you would need more megapixels.

Answer 4

Please, do not get too hung up on the mega pixels issue. Far more important for your image is the optics i.e. the lens. Only a few years ago 1 or 2 pixels was considered good, it is difficult to keep up with the new technology the whole time. Your lens is what makes the image and unless you want to blow up pictures to 16x20 then the number of pixels is not going to be an issue. A poor lens is a different story. Resolution, sharpness and speed (amount of light gathered) of the lens is what will determine the quality fo your photos.
Having said that, today even consumer cameras or pocket cameras deliver 5+ mega pixels. Forget mobile phones, they just do not have optics which can compare with a reasonably good camera.

Answer 5

Mobile phones now come with 3 megapixels.

Proffesional quality is anything above 6.

You can get great 8 megapixels cameras for around a hundered pounds. Currys, Aldi etc.

The more you can afford the better when it comes to cameras.

An remember optical zoom is more important than digital zoom
so choose a camera with a higher optical value.

You can get over 10. but unless your really serious about it there's no point.

Answer 6

3.2 Megapixels is just fine as long as you do not need to make an image over 6 x 8. It is especially fine for casual photography.
Megapixels have nothing to do with the quality of an image, it has more to do with the quality when you make larger prints.
However, if you want to create large pictures plus high quality prints of select PORTIONS of your photos, I recommend getting a larger megapixel camera.

Answer 7

3.2 is okay. But they have the 7 and 8 megapixels out now. So 3.2 is obsolete.

Answer 8

Obviously, technology marches ever onward, but 3.2 MP is still perfectly OK for e-mailing pictures (you don't want the resolution and file size too high for this anyway) and for 6"x 4" or even 7" x 5" prints.

Answer 9

Its mediocre. If you want quality images get 8-10 Mpix.

Answer 10

not by today's standards where everyone has a 6megs and up...but i never had an issue with a 3.2