Minimum megapixels for a decent digital camera (and a good brand and price range for such a camera)?

Question

I've been thinking for a long time about getting a digital camera but haven't yet done much about it, until I just got photos back from a disposable camera and was dismayed that the flash turned out really bad and I couldn't tell it was bad until I got the film developed...but by then it was too late. So what I'd like to know is what megapixel resolution I should look for in a digital camera, which brands are good and which brands I should avoid, and what a good price range is for the megapixel resolution I should be looking for. I'm not so much looking for print quality per se, just good digital reproduction.

Answer 1

I am currently also looking for a new camera to take good clear closeups.  I would highly recommend you stay away from Kodak.  I bought a ZD710 which was recommended for my needs in a lower priced camera ($200's) and it's been a nightmare.  Kodak's customer service and return policy is a joke.  So I'm now looking at some reviews of Canons online.  I think the best way is to check reviews from customers first before making your decision.  Good luck with your search.

Answer 2

looks like you want a camera for still images, actually, a digi cam with 5 mega pixels is good enough for a photo. but as the resolution hets higher, you gotta pay attention to other things as and sot merely get seduced by bold numbers. such as the lens, remember, even if u have a 10 megapixel camera, you image first ahs to get thrugh the lens. if ur lens is no good, the 10 million pixels inside will deliver a blurr.

and also the memory, suppose u have a flash memory on ur camera and trying to shoot a moving target, the images will have to be first compressed and then coded so that they can be stored in the small memory. all this takes some vital miliseconds and if ur camera moves during the process, the next frame will be full of boxes.

some cameras have a BIG flaw, whin u press the button to capture an image, the actual image that gets captured is of about half a sec later than what u need.

eg. if u shoot an athlete jumping into a swimming pool, the image captured will be of the splash created when he ahas already hit the water.

Answer 3

well i have a kodak 8 megipixle camera and it was around $200 it has an awesome picture and the zoom quality is amazing. don't settle for low megapixles. this camera will pay for itself in no time.try this link.

Answer 4

I've printed 11"x14" photos with a 4mp camera and they look fine. In fact they look great! Not grainy at all. Well only if you actually stand one feet away you might see something, but from a couple feet away it looks smooth. Don't listen to people who say you need at least 7 mp to make a 8"x10" photo. That's not true at all. I'm sure they go by what others say, and not from personal experience.

Just note that all cameras these days have at least 6mp so they can easily print photos at least 11x14 better than my old 4mp camera. Therefore the minimum mp is not even an issue. That should not be something on your mind. What you need to worry about is quality of image. For this you need to do research, and read reviews. Color accuracy, sharpness, fringing, lens distortion, and noise levels are important considerations.

I like Canon brand. They do most things right out of all the camera manufacturers. I'd rate their cameras as having the best image quality in general. Most Canon cameras have above average image quality, hence you can't go wrong with buying a Canon.

Answer 5

1.3 is equal to that of a cell phone pic.  your absolutely right.  very grainy.  if you will be printing reg 4x6 pics then 5-7 megapixels will be sufficient.  I'm partial to olympus and fuji.  if you will be blowing your pics larger than standard, that's when you need to step it up and get more megapixels.  I'm working with a fuji s1000 right now with a 12 x zoom.  I have enlarged pics to 8x10 with out losing quality.  you will probably put out around $200 for a decent cam with a few rxtra features.  good luck

Answer 6

1.3 Megapixel Nokia are the best

Answer 7

You only need to worry about mega pixels if you are printing anything larger than a standard 4 x 6 picture.   IF all you are printing is 4 x 6, any camera 1mp and over is sufficient.   The bigger the print, the more megapixels you will need for a cleaerer imagine.  For example.  If you want to print an 8x10 picture and only have a 1 MP camera, its going to be very grainy and you will not like it.  Depending on what website you go to, people say different megapixels will be good enough for an 8x10 (some say 4mp or 5mp will print a clear 8x10).  My personal opinion, you can get a 10 mp camera for under $200, I would personally go that route.  You will be able to print a very large and clear photo.  Do not save $25 and get a 3 or 4 mp camera--you will kick yourself if the *** when you actually take a picture that you love and want a poster size, just to realize that when you blow it up, it looks grainy0

.  Brand wise, when it comes to point and shoot cameras, I have had an Olympus, Sony, Fuji, Canon, Casio and Nikon and my personal favorite point and shoot camera (under $200) is the Olympus or Sony.  Over $200 I would go with a canon.  BUT the only way you can really determine what you want is to go hold one, check its options, read about it (www.dpreview.com) and make your own determination.  While one person may like Canons, another person will like Nikons, so find out for yourself!!

Answer 8

3.1 megapixels is sufficient to print a 5x7 photo. For a 8 x10 you need 7.2 megapixels.

Megapixels is not the end-all and be-all of cameras. The lens is very important. You could have a dull, blurry picture that is really really big.

If you go for the traditional camera makers you'll do okay: Canon, Nikon, or Kodak. Some of the electronics makers have teamed with quality lens makers. So some Panasonics have Leica lenses, and Sony has team with Carl Ziess for some cameras.