I'm wondering how much resolution is enough. In particular, is a 2 megapixel camera necessary to get very good quality 8x10's, or is a 1.3 or 1.5 megapixel camera sufficient?

I'm currently waffling between the Canon A50, Olympus D-450Z, and the Minolta EX ZOOM 1500. If anyone has any particular comments about the relative merits of these cameras, I'd love to hear them as well.

Thanks in advance!

-- Hal

-- Hal Schectman (schectman@hotmail.com), November 03, 1999

Answers

"Very good" quality? 2 megapixels, or better, when available.

"Okay" quality: 1.3 or even less.

Your mom will not notice the difference, but you will.

Suggestion: go to any of the popular digicam sites & download to your hard drive a few sample images from the cameras you're considering (by right-clicking on the full size image as displayed on your screen, then doing "save as..."). Then you can print out the images on your own printer and see for yourself.

Photos with very many fine details such as grass, tiny leaves, stones on the beach, etc. will certainly look better with 2 megapixel camera. Simple head shots with broad areas of similar color will not require it. -bruce

-- bruce komusin (bkomusin@bigfoot.com), November 03, 1999.

I have the A50 and have seen good results with 8X10 on an HP PhotoSmart printer. One nice feature of the A50 is its ability to store the image in CCD-raw mode with no compression. That provides the maximum "real" detail to your editing program or printer when it comes time to print that 8X10.

-- Dennis Pereira (dpereira@ultranet.com), November 04, 1999.

When you download the images on this web site, try to get the ones from the "same reviewer" such as the girl holding the flowers.

Then, on your computer take strip samples (like rolls of wallpaper) and put them side-by-side and print as an 8 X 10 on a ink jet printer.

When selcting the strips get a part of the girl's face and part of the flowers, especially the RED. The Nikon 850 sample shows haloes around the red rose, or flaring. Compare it to the same image taken with the Kodak 240 for a surprise.

-- Jim Martin (jfmartin@nr.infi.net), November 28, 1999.