You don't need more than 8 megapixels! Most people don't even print photos anymore, and that resolution is perfectly fine for viewing on screen and print.
I agree. I'm not a photographer, but I like to get creative once in a while. I've been rocking a Sony DSC-P150 7MP point-n-shoot for I don't know how many years now. For my purposes it captures great detail, and even though I can't save raw, every JPG that comes off it is still around 3MB, so my few photos take up considerable space.
I can understand pro photographers using 20MP and higher cameras as I've seen them do, but as an average consumer, I'd probably only go above 7MP if my camera broke and I found a newer higher-res one for a decent price.
...though I would love to have things like built-in HDR, extreme low-light shooting, or shutter speeds that don't require me to hold my camera still like a sniper to prevent blur.
But without touting "megapixels", what are manufacturers and electronics chains supposed to advertise? Image quality? -- Good luck! Battery life? -- Boring!
@Hello Mister Walrus: Well they'll need to plant a infiltrator in the hipster community on the LES of Manhattan to find them some catchy unknown tunes or it'll never work!
I was trying to decide at one point between the D40(6.1 MP) and the D60 (10.2 MP) Nikon. Every single time I would ask someone on flickr for their opinion they would say get the D60! Extra megapixels! Because of cost, and seeing as paying more for a VR lens in the D60, decided to go with the D40. And 6 MP is COMPLETELY FINE.
I get the most amazing night shots and the quality is fine. Everyone seems to fall for this "Megapixel Myth" and gets the D60, but when it comes down to it, seeing the night shots of my friends D60, wouldn't trade the D40 in for the D60 even if I could do it for free.
So--long story short--thanks for writing this article so people realize, like me, you don't need tons and tons of megapixels--save the money.
I was looking at buying the d40 too but after a while looking for only £40 more (£10 when my cash back comes through) i got the Sony a200 with a free 4gig memory stick and a camera bag.
@ilovexspin: I love my D40. I'm not a professional photographer, but I have used it in a professional capacity. It has done everything I needed it to do, and done it well.
Actually, you can also put some older Minolta lenses on the Alpha series. I believe they have very fine lenses too. Want even better lenses? You can get Car Zeiss lenses if you have the moolah.
@Robb Nunya: I currently use a Minolta Dimmage F300 as my camera. If my crc sensor wasn't malfunctioning and putting tiny green spots on my pictures, it would of been a camera that could still hold its own around newer cameras. Besides the defect, it takes awesome pictures, in dark light or day light...
alas, i will never be able to silence the sound of a thousand friends screaming, "but..but.. i want a phone with a lot of megapixels so i don't have to have a 'big' camera to take nice pictures!"
@Kaiser-Machead: I totally agree! They are focusing on the wrong thing. People have got all hunged up on megapixels when they dont even no what it means.
@Chariot: Now good camera functions do make for a nifty all-in-one device, but so far this spec is just about the same as those cheap Chinatown digital cameras that have no optical zoom, and tout 12 megapixels for only $50. Sure, lots and lots of megapixels, but the image sensor sucks so badly that it might as well have been the 1.3 in an old Ericsson from 2000.
03/10/09
03/10/09
and 640k ought to be enough memory for anyone, too. :)
03/10/09
Obviously if there is some new radical change in how we view photos that could change, but for the way things are now he's right.
03/10/09
I apologize for offending you, manager of Olympus Imaging's SLR planning department.
03/10/09
03/10/09
I agree. I'm not a photographer, but I like to get creative once in a while. I've been rocking a Sony DSC-P150 7MP point-n-shoot for I don't know how many years now. For my purposes it captures great detail, and even though I can't save raw, every JPG that comes off it is still around 3MB, so my few photos take up considerable space.
I can understand pro photographers using 20MP and higher cameras as I've seen them do, but as an average consumer, I'd probably only go above 7MP if my camera broke and I found a newer higher-res one for a decent price.
03/10/09
...though I would love to have things like built-in HDR, extreme low-light shooting, or shutter speeds that don't require me to hold my camera still like a sniper to prevent blur.
02/18/09
A $200 point and shoot can easily outperform a $1500+ DSLR.
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
I was trying to decide at one point between the D40(6.1 MP) and the D60 (10.2 MP) Nikon. Every single time I would ask someone on flickr for their opinion they would say get the D60! Extra megapixels! Because of cost, and seeing as paying more for a VR lens in the D60, decided to go with the D40. And 6 MP is COMPLETELY FINE.
I get the most amazing night shots and the quality is fine. Everyone seems to fall for this "Megapixel Myth" and gets the D60, but when it comes down to it, seeing the night shots of my friends D60, wouldn't trade the D40 in for the D60 even if I could do it for free.
So--long story short--thanks for writing this article so people realize, like me, you don't need tons and tons of megapixels--save the money.
02/18/09
I was looking at buying the d40 too but after a while looking for only £40 more (£10 when my cash back comes through) i got the Sony a200 with a free 4gig memory stick and a camera bag.
but both are nice cameras
02/18/09
02/18/09
[/Canon Fanboy]
02/18/09
Actually, you can also put some older Minolta lenses on the Alpha series. I believe they have very fine lenses too. Want even better lenses? You can get Car Zeiss lenses if you have the moolah.
02/19/09
I believe it has a Minolta GT lens on it...
02/18/09
Good article Gizmodo.
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/18/09
02/02/09
02/02/09
02/02/09
11/07/08