8 Megapixels? Rant
I am so tired of the megapixel race. Does the average joe/jane need more than 3 or 4 megapixels? I don't think so.
I wish the manufacturers would focus on the timings of the cameras. I see some improvement in this area but I think it is a place where there can be more improvement.
Would do you all think??
I wish the manufacturers would focus on the timings of the cameras. I see some improvement in this area but I think it is a place where there can be more improvement.
Would do you all think??
7 Comments:
You are totally right on that. I use a 3 mp camera for photography for product catalogs and flyers. Plenty of pixels to get the quality even on an 8 x10. The speed of the shot would be nice to improve. Most people I recommend no more than 3 for what they use it for.
Since when does the e-bay fanatic going to put up pictures that large, say 1600 x 1200 pixels?? Most can get by with a $200 or less camera.
-debunked
I always like to stay behind the leading edge, if 8 MP is the lastest and greatest I'd never buy, but if price difference between other cameras with different pixel count isn't much different then no problem. More pixels doesn't necessarily have to be huge images, if the camera supports "smart" digital zoom then it's all good.
Count rant about pros and cons of "bigger and better" for hours. That's my 2 cents for now though.
Yes, speed is definitely something that needs improvements.
Yes very true, even on my old and basic 35mm it was dead easy to take long exposure shots. Whereas on my digicam, I can't get the results as before.
Thank you!
[url=http://kxcbzscs.com/otpe/iuwc.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://rfmkggrm.com/ixjo/vbmm.html]Cool site[/url]
Well done!
My homepage | Please visit
Good design!
http://kxcbzscs.com/otpe/iuwc.html | http://vepvywqu.com/klmc/brxh.html
Post a Comment
<< Digital Photography Blog