I don't worry about MP. My 2mp Oly camedia P&S does pics that are seemingly
ok for up to 8x10 and even A4 - 11-3/4 x 8-1/4. My 6mp DR will easily do
that and more and should be good for at least A3 at 16.54x11.69 and even
20x16 or A2 at 23.39x16.54. Since I don't need more than A4 anyway I don't
really see the need for higher resolutions.
My DR gives results that are at least comparable to 35mm and often better
than 35mm - though there may a number of factors involved there. For
example, I don't have any filters yet for the DR and the camera and lens is
a lot newer than my old film cameras and their lenses. I often shoot when
its twilight (as I love the colour of the sky then and the deep shades in
the shadows). Digital is *much* better at taking shots at low-light levels -
apart from camera shake - but I'm hoping that a lens with IS will cure that
when I get one.
Allan
PS No trees were harmed in the sending of this message and a very large
number of electrons were asked their permission to be terribly
inconvenienced. (And threw a party for them afterwards for being really cool
about it).
Disrupting the unnatural balance that you, as a conscious human being and a
confused mass of energy, have created.
-Disturb the mind -
>From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Re: Megapixels and printing photos (long)
>Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 18:43:04 -0500
>
>To which I reply, once again, balderdash. But it's true. If you're
>going to print a book the publisher will demand this 300 ppi "photo
>quality". I'm not printing books and I don't care. I'm also not doing
>architectural photography where I'd like all the details to be sharp as
>a tack. In my photo world a 3MP image can make a beautiful 24x36
>portrait... designed, of course, to be viewed from several feet away and
>not the 25cm/10" reading distance for a typical book or magazine.
>
>Chuck Norcutt
>
>Brian Swale wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Back in Wed, 15 November 2006, Ali Shah gave us a long extract from two
> > pages of the http://www.design215.com website.
> >
> > Shortly I'll repeat them below.
> > At the time that Ali sent us these I did not have the free time to look
>into
> > them, but I extracted his posting from the Digest and printed it out for
>future
> > reference, and that took place last night and now..
> >
> > When Ali sent us these, his posting was quickly knocked sideways with
> > some forceful responses that cast doubt on the assertions in the pages
>and
> > seemed to kill off a lot of discussion. I thought and still think the
>matter
> > needs to be revisited.
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|