Camera advice needed.

rizla01

Thanks.

Must admit I couldn't even find out which was the latest model.

So so far it's the 630 but the 600 is dearer and has more built in memory (20meg as opposed to 16 meg)

Blacksheep1979

well the built in memory is good for 4/5 pics so is almost pointless - give her the one with image stabalisation, far more useful

rizla01

YEs. Youi are right.

The 630 it is then. Thanks.

Now, who wants to buy a Samsung s600?

isofa

deelip wrote: »

You should go with the camera that has more mega pixel into it. That wll be better for long term process

Definitely not.

There are many factors, but the top one affecting image quality is the lens not the number of Megapixels, as Blacksheep1979 mentioned earlier.

A 10MP camera with a cheap lens, will produce inferior pictures to a 6MP camera with a high quality lens.

Most consumers will never need anything past 6-8MP, but marketing tries to push higher is better, because it's the only way many people will upgrad an older camera. Just depends how much the user want's to crop an original image, or print to a large size, but 90% of users will be served perfectly by 6-8MP.

I have thousands on pounds of pro kit, but it is my lenses which are the jewel, some costing 3 times as much the camera body. The pictures I can take with these optics are miles above anything than any camera with an basic lens can produce - regardless of how many extra pixels they can output.

Quality not quantity... as with so much in life

Good camera reviews at: https://www.dpreview.com

Lyrrad

deelip wrote: »

You should go with the camera that has more mega pixel into it. That wll be better for long term process

Just to add to this myth. It is actually worth noting that the more mega pixels one tries to place on any given sensor the more of a noise related issue the manufacturer has. On a point & shoot costing under £250 the solution will always be on board software. If a camera is reducing noise it is nearly always a detremental step. Most serious users would always prefer the option of reducing noise in Photoshop etc.

So large mega pixels keeps the sales going, yet really does not benefit the user.

I am using film cameras that are over 50 years old.

What fantastic marketing to bring photography to all and sundry and at the same time create a myth that we all need to upgrade our camera every 2-3 years.

As already pointed out here. A camera is basically a biscuit tin, it's the hands that hold the camera and the glass attatched to it that create the great images.

sleep2much

Don't get drawn into the mega pixel debate, using fantasticly good mega pixels will give fantastic huge images, unless your going to view them on a cinema screen it's a pretty wasted option, if you are going to crop your pictures then it's a good thing, but if your just going look on your tv or computer or just get them printed 2 mega pixel is plenty good enough, even a 2 mega pixel image is nearly too big for email, I'm sure somebody will say I'm wrong, and that 5 mega pixel or more is a must.....I challenge them to take 2 pictures, one at 2 mega pixel the other at 10mp, look at them on the screen and try to tell the differance.......not a lot.