lens quality vs. megapixel size...

[al_gore]

I own a HP Photosmart 812.
I am very unhappy with the quality of photos it takes.
I would like to upgrade.
I can spend $400.00, maybe a little more.

I have shopped in the past with this notion in mind:
The larger the megapixel, the better the camera.

I am now under the impression that the larger the megapixels are, the larger the printed photo can be, NOT the better the image will be.
A 4 megapixel camera does not neccessarily take better quality pictures than a 2 or 3 megapixel camera.

I do not need to print large photos.
The largest photo I will EVER print is 8 x 11.
And I will do that rarely.
Mostly I view the images on-screen.

I need a camera that takes crystal clear, crisp, sharp images of interior shot portraiture.
Color accuracy and focus is important to me.

I don't care about video clips.
I don't care about printing a photo that can be used as a billboard.

So, I've come to the conclusion that I'm way off base shopping for a camera with the size of the megapixel as my criteria.
I need to find a camera with a good LENS.
I haven't a clue on how to do that.

I'm considering the Sony CD500 with a Carl Zeiss lens.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/cd500.html

Does anyone have a better suggestion?

thank you
al

[Onyx]

Unfortunately, Sony are merely cashing in on the known brandname of Carl Zeiss in their lineup of cameras featuring what they claim to be Zeiss lenses. They are not "real" Zeiss (ie. not made in Germany), they are merely Sony manufactured supposed to Zeiss standards - and IMHO they fall short of that. Compare images taken with this supposed brandname lens with those from other manufacturers which have no marketing hype behind it, and you will observe little difference in optical quality.

While it is true that lens quality has much more to do with image quality than megapixels rating, unfortunately it seems that due to consumer expectation and price pressures nearly all digicam manufacturers cut costs which impact negatively on image quality, whilst boosting marketable terms (eg. new imaging processor, additional acronyms of questionable use) seemingly offering more to the consumer for less money.

It is much better for a consumer to shop for a camera with the desired feature set, rather than for a supposed best optical quality - as the difference in image quality between digicam brands is negligible.

[al_gore]

Thank you, Onyx.

Very interesting points.



al.