Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 4, 2003, 9:13 PM   #1
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Victoria, B.C., Canada
Posts: 852
Default What to buy next?

I started off with a 1.5 megapixel camera (Leica Digilux zoom - same as the Fuji 1700MX) and then added an Olympus C2100UZ.

Lately I started to hanker after a camera with more megapixels, but have done nothing about it.

Yesterday though, I saw pictures displayed on a bigger monitor than my own 17 inch ADI Microscan. The bigger one was my son's 19-inch Samsung 955DFF with 0.20 dot pitch. I was so impressed that I've just bought one.

It may be that more megapixels will give tend to give better prints. But I seldom bother with prints, except small ones, 3 1/2 x 5. Nearly all of my viewing is done using a monitor.

Using my new monitor, I've looked at pictures taken with the old 1.5 megapixel camera - and now I ask myself - if prints aren't a big deal for you, why would you want a camera with more than around 1.5 or 2.0 megapixels? The pictures taken on my old 1.5 megapixel camera, viewed on the screen, seem to me to be razor-sharp and full of detail.

MY conclusion is - if you want to see better quality pictures and if you'd rather view them on your monitor than as prints - then your money's better spent on a good monitor than on a camera with extra megapixels.

Does anybody agree?
Herb is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 4, 2003, 9:17 PM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585

I view more pics on the monitor than I print. The c2100 will provide excellent prints and pics on a monitor as well.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2003, 9:48 PM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 116

Also, wouldn't more MP be important if you needed to do a lot of cropping?

I like to have the ability to crop, and also when I do get a shot that I really like (a rare enough event), I usually like to print it out, and I never know when I might like to print it out in a large size.
rych26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2003, 9:55 PM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 240

For me, half the fun of photography is sharing pics with others--friends and relatives. A lot of them don't have computers or access to internet, so printing is a must.
Hyun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2003, 8:22 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 149

If you are viewing almost entirely via a computer screen, 2.0 MP is more than adequate. It's even great for 4x6 prints. Good for 5.x7 too.
jsmeeker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2003, 4:37 PM   #6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 823

Herb, I agree! Viewing pics taken with just about any good digital camera viewed on a good 19" monitor is a startling improvement over even the very best 15 or 17 inch models. As cheap as monitors are these days, unless you have space constraints a 19 inch monitor is the way to go...
lg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2003, 5:02 PM   #7
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910

I agree...I had a flatscreen 15" for 7 years, and it was the right time to buy a 19". In my case I bought a Samsung SyncMaster 957MB; chose that one because it didn't have those damn Trinitron/Aperture-Grill lines (2-3 horizontal wires that show up black on the display).

Also, if you're editing photos go for a CRT over an LCD...sure LCDs look nice, but they're not good for editing, and unless you get a good one you can have spots dimmer than others. Plus the backlight has a limited life, and it costs a great deal more than a larger CRT.
Mike_PEAT is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:38 AM.