Home Shutterbug Strasse

A photographer's haven for the lastest in digital or traditional film cameras.

Re: resolution vs. quality

66.81.71.214

I own a 1.3 megapixel Vivitar. It's large and uses 4 AA batteries, definitely not state of the art. But - the lens is excellent with very low distortion and large glass area, the autofocus works vary well (it has no zoom) and the light metering is just about optimal.
I recently bought el-cheapo 3.3 megapixel camera that's small and light, but when it comes to quality of picture for posting on the web, I find that the higher resolution buys me nothing, since I always reduce the size of the image files to acceptable levels, and that would require reducing the resolution anyway.
I end up going back to the old trusty Vivitar...
Of course, if I'd paid $400 for the new camera then probably it would have benn closer in optical quality to the Vivitar. But I recall you saying a "cheap camera"...
So my advice is to look for the features you need, not just the megapixel or bells and whistles that you don't.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Kimber Kable  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • Re: resolution vs. quality - serus 22:50:23 06/29/04 (0)

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.