how important/significant/noticeable is the difference between 3.2 and 5 megapixel?

there's a sweet camera i saw that was not only TINY but pretty cheap too and it was 3.2. there are ones that are 5, but they are slightly bigger and more expensive.

i dunno what that number means in layman's terms.

how will the difference manifest itself in the photos taken?

is it always recommended to go for the higher number when possible?

is it likely that i'd later regret buying a 3.2 instead of a 5?


many thanks

Nah, not really.

I prefer size to megapixel stuff.

What's also important is optical zoom. Digital zoom is pants.

will you ever be making posters out of these photos? if not. you're cool, i'd think

eh.. apparently they go a lot higher than 5, huh.

i basically want the smallest, tiny camera that is cool and good. and i don't feel like spending a ton of money for once in my life

i saw it at the apple store, i forget who made it, but it was one of the well known ones.

canon? olympus? uh.. i forget, damn!

i used to have a cannon digital. it was shit

posters are pretty unlikely, i just want to document some of the awesome sights i see in SF.

what should i look for in zoom?

i liked it cause it was so small, it might have been the size of an ipod mini or smaller

anyone know what brand they carry at the apple store? they only had one, i can't recall which one it was

that's it, im putting on my roommate's sundan lotion and goin to the park, its too nice outside!!

applestore.com says cannon


i'd go to some consumer review site and see what people say about the specific one you were looking at.


(the cannon i had was eons ago, it's likely they've gotten better)

coll thanks!

odds are i'll be able to get the same cam for cheaper not at the apple store, right?

I have the fuiji A345 which I recommend. 4.2 megapixel, small and sturdy..about 200 bones

also, how do you take good pics? mariner, pink_ribbon_scars, et. al. pls respond kthxiloveyou

Originally posted by Jerome
also, how do you take good pics? mariner, pink_ribbon_scars, et. al. pls respond kthxiloveyou

grab your nuts then hit the button

Originally posted by Jerome
also, how do you take good pics? mariner, pink_ribbon_scars, et. al. pls respond kthxiloveyou Know what you want the shot to look like, and don't just go pressing shit.

And blurry doesn't = good.

As far as megapixels go, it just depends. We bought an Olympus C800 (eight megapixels), but that fits our needs more. If you'll be printing the pictures, or even looking at them in large formats on the computer, the higher the better.

The more megapixels give you more depth and more dots per inch - kind of like the old school printers.

<3 my 4mp canon powershot

there's a minute-scale difference between a 3.2M and 5.0M pixel image of the same subject. it's only readily apparent in large formats or when you're "zoomed" way in, but once you get an eye for it, you will notice the difference even when images are in smaller formats or are "zoomed out", and it will make for a discernable improvement in 'feel' to have a 5.0 image. that only matters if you're being really anal or getting really artsy. if you're just taking "sightseeing" pics or pics of friends and stuff like that, 3.2 will be fine.

Originally posted by Jerome
also, how do you take good pics? mariner, pink_ribbon_scars, et. al. pls respond kthxiloveyou

3/4 of the battle is being willing to go the extra mile to get to a location or be out there at the time that you know will have good photo potential. you can't be lazy and consistently get great pictures. my favorite pics i've taken required me to be out in the middle of -40C weather or storm-force winds, or to be up at the early crack of dawn, or to think hard enough about what i was shooting to prompt myself to walk/climb/hike a longer distance than anyone else shooting in the same place to get the location/angle/lighting just right.

lighting is everything. you generally want to be taking pictures with light behind you, shining toward your subject. shooting into your light source pretty much guarantees you crappy pictures, unless you're doing something very purposeful and particular with shooting at your light source. the best lighting for pictures is, of course, natural sunlight, and the best natural sunlight happens in the 3-4 hour period after sunrise and before sunset, when the sun is low, shadows are long and distinct, and the light is warm and golden. midday is tough because the sunlight is harsh and washed-out, and the sun can be so high in the sky that shooting in almost any direction is like shooting into the light source.

be constantly aware of what's in the frame. fill your frame with your subject(s), and pay attention to what's going on in the foreground and the backg</>round, and whether you want those elements to come into play. set your pictures up to have a purposeful symmetry or asymmetry.

beyond that, it's just a matter of being in the right place at the right time. the more often you bring your camera with, and the more aware you are of potential photo opportunities, the better your chances of being in the right place/right time.

Oh Mariner, you're so rugged. Protect me.

*wraps yuo in a kilt*

thanks mariner!! so what i'm hearing here is that a 5 would be recommended, assuming i develop an interest in good pics.

i'm going to try to find a good balance between size/pixels/price. i'm probably going to let size win out though


also, i appreciate your insight on the things required for good pics. if i got up at 5 am in 40 below weather with gale force winds and got a shot of you getting a shot of an iceberg, how awesome wojuld that be>!?!?!>!>!!":#EKJ:LWhf;kjald

the one i really liekd was onely 200 bones, i gotta find a very small 5 megapixel one and hope the price isok

Originally posted by Jerome
thanks mariner!! so what i'm hearing here is that a 5 would be recommended, assuming i develop an interest in good pics.

i'm going to try to find a good balance between size/pixels/price. i'm probably going to let size win out though


also, i appreciate your insight on the things required for good pics. if i got up at 5 am in 40 below weather with gale force winds and got a shot of you getting a shot of an iceberg, how awesome wojuld that be>!?!?!>!>!!":#EKJ:LWhf;kjald Yeah, I didn't type anything either.

Originally posted by sppunk
Yeah, I didn't type anything either.


it felt like you were just rubbing in how you are winning at life man. you said 8 megapixel, totally showing me up, then highlighted that i'm single (a fact which i like for the time being, btw), and you're not single, by saying it fits "our" needs. and my school didn't even HAVE printers man!!!!!!

Originally posted by Jerome



it felt like you were just rubbing in how you are winning at life man. you said 8 megapixel, totally showing me up, then highlighted that i'm single (a fact which i like for the time being, btw), and you're not single, by saying it fits "our" needs. and my school didn't even HAVE printers man!!!!!! Haha.

I personally prefer more megapixels over the actual size. I carry around lenses anyway, so a case is required regardless of the physical size of the camera.

You're looking at a point-and-shoot, right?

I have a 3 megapixel camera that's really small, but I kind of wish I had a 5 megapixel one so that I could take better pictures for computer wallpapers and such. I also find that my small camera takes a lot longer to take one picture than my bigger, but much older, digital camera.

A small camera is cool for spy work though, which I am forced to do often because I work for the FBI.

Originally posted by Jerome

if i got up at 5 am in 40 below weather with gale force winds and got a shot of you getting a shot of an iceberg, how awesome wojuld that be>!?!?!>!>!!":#EKJ:LWhf;kjald


i would probably try to marry you.

which would be really akward.

yeah point and shoot and i'd like to to be as small as possible, preferable close in size to my cellphone. this one was like about the size of an ipod mini

casue this way i'd be mor einclidned to carry it around with me cause i could put it in my pocket

you know, since you're all into the single life right now.

Originally posted by Mariner
which would be really akward.

i think you're right, i think we're best off as rugged friends

Originally posted by Mariner



i would probably try to marry you. Jerome has a long line for possible "male brides" already so don't try to cut anyone or anything.

hahahah, netphoria is pretty fun this afternoon!! thx guys!!

Originally posted by Jerome


i think you're right, i think we're best off as rugged friends

i don't know, that sounds pretty gay

well spank me and call me susan!!! i've NEVER sounded gay on here, and i'm not about to start now!! let's talk one on one and see if we can't smooth this one out, k?

Originally posted by Jerome
well spank me and call me susan!!! i've NEVER sounded gay on here, and i'm not about to start now!! let's talk one on one and see if we can't smooth this one out, k?

are you propositioning me?

i'm just saying i can get behind whatever you've got and give it some forward thrust, so let's get the convo going

wait, how come everything i'm saying now sounds like a guy innuendo??

WHAT"S GOING ON HERE>AS:>DOIDSAJHF:LKJDS

Originally posted by Jerome

wait, how come everything i'm saying now sounds like a guy innuendo??


now that i think about it, even this thread title is a little suggestive. you think you could tone this down a bit, j?

i'll try, i've really lost my way :(

are you really using "a mobile device" or is my AIM lying to me? (this wouldn't be the first time)

no, no mobile device, what gives?!

i don't know what's going on. i'm typing shit to you but when i hit enter it just disappears, i'm guessing you're not even seeing it

it shows you being signed off and stuff, i'm not getting any text except for when you siad you weren't sure what was going on and asked if i could see any of this

Originally posted by Jerome
it shows you being signed off and stuff, i'm not getting any text except for when you siad you weren't sure what was going on and asked if i could see any of this

but you actually got that?

i think my computer is a crack whore

Originally posted by Mariner
i think my computer is a crack whore

ask her what she thinks of bill's blog

i give up, this thing is seriously whacked out right now. i'm going to restart it, defrag it, and call it a night. take 'er easy buddy.

goodnight man!! good luck too

Originally posted by Jerome


ask her what she thinks of bill's blog

GAME. OVER.

i'm really not very knowledgeable about this stuff, except to say that mine is something like 5.3 megapixels and i really like it. mine has 2 settings: 5mp and 1mp. in my opinion, 1mp are really too small and and crappy to mess with, so i leave it set to 5mp. the only time when i really notice a difference is when i try to print a pictures on 8x10 scale or when i want to use photoshop to crop the image down and then print the cropped image or use it as a desktop or something. at lower than 5mp you usually end up getting some pixelation. i think 3.5mp is perfectly fine if you only want to print pictures at the small 4x6 scale or if you just want to share reasonably small pics on the internet with friends, but if you want to try to take great pictures and be able to be versatile with what you do with the images, i would go for the 5mp. if you can't find a 5mp one that is comfy enough in your pocket that you'll want to carry it, then 5mp won't do you as much good as 3mp. you know what i'm sayin?

i've really enjoyed my camera more than i ever thought i would.

Originally posted by pink_ribbon_scars
i'm really not very knowledgeable about this stuff, except to say that mine is something like 5.3 megapixels and i really like it. mine has 2 settings: 5mp and 1mp. in my opinion, 1mp are really too small and and crappy to mess with, so i leave it set to 5mp. the only time when i really notice a difference is when i try to print a pictures on 8x10 scale or when i want to use photoshop to crop the image down and then print the cropped image or use it as a desktop or something. at lower than 5mp you usually end up getting some pixelation. i think 3.5mp is perfectly fine if you only want to print pictures at the small 4x6 scale or if you just want to share reasonably small pics on the internet with friends, but if you want to try to take great pictures and be able to be versatile with what you do with the images, i would go for the 5mp. if you can't find a 5mp one that is comfy enough in your pocket that you'll want to carry it, then 5mp won't do you as much good as 3mp. you know what i'm sayin?

i've really enjoyed my camera more than i ever thought i would.

thank you axl rose, that was helpful! :)

AH NAH, thank you!!!!

:crazy:

Originally posted by pink_ribbon_scars
AH NAH, thank you!!!!

:crazy: heheh.. Is axl rose a public account because so far about five people have fessed up to being him?

nah, i'm not axl rose, but i did start saying, "you know what i'm saying???" just because axl says it and it is stuck in my head now.

i am not as cool as mr rose so i'm not even going to try and front.

Originally posted by ammy


(the cannon i had was eons ago, it's likely they've gotten better)

when i bought my digicam last year, netphoria TOLD me to go with the canon.

i've dropped it so many times, and its still working. its big compared to what is out there now, but i like it. I lose small things

Originally posted by **********



I'm pretty sure I was one of the people who posted in favor of the Canon. I'm an unofficial Canon representative.

yeah its possible! plus i beleive Shawna and Julio have the exact same camera as me and they both said it was great

hey meow how many megapixels is yours?

Originally posted by Jerome
hey meow how many megapixels is yours?

3.2

i just got a big memory card and keep it on the 'super fine' setting. that way my pictures usually look pretty good

here is a sample (note, i don't take that great of pictures):

<img src="http://forums.netphoria.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=1663460">

this has been resized to be smaller...

<img src="http://forums.netphoria.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=1663464">

hmm, cool. thanks! can someone post a 5 megapixel pic please?

Originally posted by pink_ribbon_scars
ah nah
"you know what i'm saying???"
I think the evidence is clear.

my pictures don't do my camera any justice...
i have these ones though...

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/IMG_0115.jpg" width="800">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/IMG_0125.jpg" width="800">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/winter1.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/winter2.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

all these lake pictures are from when i was fiddling with the manual settings on my camera

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/aIMG_0124.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/aIMG_0113.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

ithink they are pretty cool, but i am no photographer

Here are some 5 Megapixel pictures.. Obviously resizing the quality and size of all these pictures make it hard to tell the difference between 3 and 5 megapixels.

argh.. I should upload them somewhere. forgive me for spamming DUDES.

woha these are cool pics meow and oranjes!

j/

k/

Originally posted by Jerome
woha these are cool pics meow and oranjes! thanks. I didn't take them. They're from another forum where someone posted about his new 5 megapixel camera.

ok here are the last few... of people this time just so you can have a look

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/aIMG_0102.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/aIMG_0109.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

and i thought this one was kind of neat though it didn't turn out how i wanted...

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/notworthtelling/aIMG_0104.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

Originally posted by Oranjes
k/

aw not even comparable. you are a photograper. i am not.

but those are pretty sweet pics

just for comparison (yet again) this picture was taken with a 2.0 mp camera... its about 3 years old now (my dad's).

interesting.. i'm going to have to check out the various offereings the sotres have, cause 5 is looking pretty tight, but i wanna see how small they can make those cameras, and then price of course.


i'm going to make a jager bomb and take a shower, tonight is gonna be a good night!!!

this is the first time i've actually made a jager bomb AT HOME :erm

Originally posted by Jerome
interesting.. i'm going to have to check out the various offereings the sotres have, cause 5 is looking pretty tight, but i wanna see how small they can make those cameras, and then price of course.


i'm going to make a jager bomb and take a shower, tonight is gonna be a good night!!!

this is the first time i've actually made a jager bomb AT HOME :erm

if i personally were going out to buy a camera right now, i would get at least a 4. My 3.2 is good, but the prices have really come down.

and look at the features too. mine has a ton of auto settings (ie snow, fireworks, landscape, people, etc) but you can also use the manual settings like apature too if you ever want to get into that kind of thing. you can add lenses to mine too... BUT its bulkier... it takes 4 AA batteries (and lasts forever), but i like my electronics so i am less likely to loose them. My brother just bought a 7.0 mp camera that is the size of my cell phone... he puts it in his shirt pocket and it is so thin that you can't even tell its there. i'd lose that for sure.

remember: optical zoom is way more important than digital zoom.

Originally posted by meow


aw not even comparable. you are a photograper. i am not.

but those are pretty sweet pics I didn't take those photos! LOL.. If I showed you the photos I took, you'd look like god with a camera..dot..dot..

Jerome.. This is from the thread I stole the pics from; "I paid $367.95 for the camera and $76 for the Corsair 1 GB CF and bought it from Newegg."
Just in case, you were wondering the price. Oh and the camera is a Cannon Power Shot S60 5MP.

and i have the canon powershot a75

Originally posted by **********
One thing about my camera though, its not all that great at taking pictures of the sky/horizon/etc.

I just like taking close-up artsy type photos.


http://www.*********.org/bz/nz/photo/digi/05_03.jpg

http://www.*********.org/bz/nz/photo/digi/05_01.jpg


Actually I guess its not that bad at atmosphere-type pictures..

http://www.*********.org/bz/nz/photo/digi/03_10.JPG

what kind of camera do you have

ps i like the last one... its cool. the colours rock.

J, i think your best bet would be to take the files (that are not resized) from a GOOD 3mp picture and a GOOD 5mp picture to your local target or wherever develops digital pictures, and decide from that. Ultimately, you will want a good enough picture (to your standards) so that you can either print yourself or get developed - and they look really good in that format.

If you are happy with the 3, then get the camera you want with the features you want, and don't go spending loads of money if you don't have to. If you prefer the 5, then start comparing prices. Often Walmart and Target and places like that sell cameras for DIRT cheap, but other locations will honour those prices - go to wherever offers you the best warranty as well - you never know what will happen to it.

PLUS go buy a huge memory card if you don't have one with the camera. I never take pictures with anything less than the superfine setting because i dont want to go home and be like 'aw fuck i'd love to get that developed but its on a crappy setting on my camera'

http://gallery.photographyreview.com/showgallery.php?cat=518&password=
This site compares camera photos, but it doesn't show the megapixels. You have to look up the camera model and find out.

I'm not sure if it will help.

hey guys, i got a camera!!

thanks for all the help!!

canon powershot sd 300 ELPH

4 megapixels, 3x optical zoom, very tiny

i hope i like it

there was a 5 megapixel one for a little more, he said the difference was how big you could make the photo and showed me how big we were talking,and i honestly don't believe i'd have a use for a photo that large

i got a 1 gb memory card, cause he said it oculd do 30 minutes of video, i thought that was fucking amazing!!!

awesome, jerome!

thanks! i'm pretty excited, the battery is charging right now and im headed out to dinner, but i'll try to provide some cool pics of SF for you dudes!

unfortunately, i'll mostly only be able to take pics on weekends, so i tmight be a while

:banoonoo:

3.2 will give you shitty pics.

Originally posted by Jerome
canon powershot sd 300 ELPH

4 megapixels, 3x optical zoom, very tiny

i hope i like it

there was a 5 megapixel one for a little more, he said the difference was how big you could make the photo and showed me how big we were talking,and i honestly don't believe i'd have a use for a photo that large

i got a 1 gb memory card, cause he said it oculd do 30 minutes of video, i thought that was fucking amazing!!!

that's pretty sweet, i expect great things out of you now.

Originally posted by Hera
3.2 will give you shitty pics.

you are wrong. and a c<i></i>ock.