Re-hash 6 megapixel

[oops]

I know this has been presented and answered in several ways but a forum search didn't return enough info.

I hear most of you eagerly awaiting an affordable 6 meg camera before you would part with or set aside the G1. For those of you doing large print, this is understandable. For those of us viewing with a monitor @ 640x480 and printing two or four to a page for the scrapbook, what would be gained over the G1?

Is a 6 meg image viewed at 640x480 better (sharper) than a 3.1 image? What about at full size for the G1, say 11x8? Does 6 meg give you more artistic flexability with dof, etc.?

If you had to choose a replacement for your G1, would you jump at a D30 when it's successor drives down the price or would you continue to hold out for the 6 meg?

Thanks.

[oops]

Oops! Please substitute 3.3 where I put 3.1

Also, as a footnote, The G1 offers iso 50 which, to my way of thinking, is the only "usable" iso. The D30 has several very smooth iso options.

[Kevin M]

My understanding of it is that the number of camera pixels governs the size of a printed image at photographic quality. This is usually around a DPI of 300 or more. Monitors on the other hand are only 72 -96 Dpi which often makes it difficult to judge the sharpness of fine detail on screen. All in all monitors as they stand at present are pretty crude viewing instruments compared to a 5x4 transparency on a light table.

[dbookbinder]

For viewing at 640 x 480 or printing small prints, the only advantage to a 6 mp camera would be that you could blow up a small part of your picture and get decent sharpness.

I think a reasonable analogy could be made between the difference between, say, a 35mm camera and a 2 1/4 by 2 1/4 camera. If all you are printing is 5x7 or 8x10 pictures, you won't see the difference. But if you want to blow a picture up to 16x20, the larger format will produce a sharper, less grainy picture, given the same film, photographer, subject, etc.

[dbookbinder]

By the way, for comparisons sake between digital and film, a 35mm film image is estimated to contain the equivalent of about 30-40 megapixels.

- David

[Pekka]

dbookbinder wrote:

By the way, for comparisons sake between digital and film, a 35mm film image is estimated to contain the equivalent of about 30-40 megapixels.

- David

Quote from http://www.luminous-landscape.com/merklinger.htm :

"B&W vs Colour. That 40 megapixel image is achievable with 35mm cameras with low speed black and white film like Kodak technical Pan. Colour film is only about one-third as sharp in objective testing. (See, for example John B. Williams' book "Image Clarity" or Kodak's Technical Information on Professional Products.) To the eye, the difference is not nearly so great - so important is colour to perception. So, for 35 mm images, effective pixel count is typically on the order of 4.5 megapixels (40 divided by 9) for colour images."

[oops]

So, in this example, a 35mm color pic would equal 4.5 megapixels where a 6 megapixel digital camera would actually produce a color image with better resolution than film?

If I understand this correctly, the 6 meg would be worth waiting for? Even over the D30 SLR?

My quandry is; I love watching the digital scene for the latest and greatest but I must have a plan for my eventual successor to the G1. Without some sort of mental priority list as I view these new cameras I will be lost, confused, and dissatisfied with what I have not even yet mastered.

I read a few threads from the D30 forum here and was shocked at the apparent differences between the D30 and the G1. There was a discussion about ISO with the D30 and how it compared to the G1 and I realized, with the G1, I can only really trust ISO 50 for noise-free shots. If I were able to trust ISO 100 and, God forbid, ISO 200 with the G1 it would change the whole way I shoot pictures. The "f8 limitation" would not really be a limitation at all with the aperture/shutter speed/ISO triangle complete.

If the CMOS ccd of the D30 coupled with SLR lens selection capability and longer focal length make a HUGE difference even in the hands of a novice like me then the 3.11 megapixel, based on the way I shoot and print, is no problem at all and the D30 is my dream camera.

If, on the other hand, they spank 6 megapixels on a ccd type ccd with a permanent lens and tell me all I can do is make larger prints for $700 or $800 more and I will need an electron microscope to tell the difference I will have to say no thanks.

Am I making sense or am I confused?

[dbookbinder]

Interesting piece on color film vs CCDs. Until I bought my G1, I hadn't shot color for anything other than snapshots and hadn't realized that it didn't equal, by such a large factor, B & W in clarity.

- David