3 ms·
> under 6MP a camera is only usable for publishing on Facebook. 2560x1600 pixels is 4.1MP. At 1:1 that will completely fill the most monstrous computer monitor
by gjm11 15y ago
> under 6MP a camera is only usable for publishing on Facebook.
2560x1600 pixels is 4.1MP. At 1:1 that will completely fill the most monstrous computer monitors one can get for under about $10k. At 300 pixels per linear inch (a very reasonable resolution for photos; about the same as the iPhone 4 "retina" display) it will give you a picture with 10" diagonal.
Unless you're making posters or big prints for photographic competitions or something, even at 4MP raw pixel count is not going to be your problem. It's completely untrue that below 6MP your pictures will be useless for anything beyond Facebook.
(Of course pixel count starts to matter more if, e.g., you're taking pictures of distant birds or distant celebrities with a not-especially-long lens and you need to crop heavily. Most photographers, most of the time, are not doing that.)
- finisterre 15y agoDon't forget about pixel quality (it's understandable because the industry has been encouraging it for years). A 6MP sensor would produce a fantastic 10"-diagonal print if its pixels weren't affected by noise and it was combined with a high quality lens. Unfortunately sensors of that resolution are typically small (=noisy pixels) and placed in point-and-shoot cameras (=cramped, low-quality optics).
- oikjhgbpokj 15y agoOr you could buy a top of the range pro DSLR from 5years ago with this resolution, with fantastic lenses and bullet proof build for the price of a modern entry level camera