close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

3.2 vs 4.1 or >

Discussion in 'Through-the-Lens Club' started by Wulfenite, Jun 17, 2004.

  1. Wulfenite

    Wulfenite The King

    I'm looking to get a digital camera. It will probably be one of the compact models like the little Cannons or Sonys since I want somthing that can be brought along fairly effortlessly. Of course this means it will have minimal zoom and I'll be croping later to bring the subject in closer.

    Trying to figure out what's "enough" resolution.

    Assuming you're shooting at full resolution, is 3.2 enough resolution for photo quality prints provided you dont do really big enlargements AND dont do too much croping to make up for the cameras lack of real zoom.

    Also....

    Does anybody rate the cameras by how much/often they pause before taking a picture after you've pressed the button. I borrowed one camera that would sometimes take the picture right away and sometimes pause a second or two. Very annoying and problematic for action shots.
     
  2. saber41

    saber41 Guest

    I always try to get the most camera for the money that I want to spend, the most bang for the buck !!

    Depending on your needs, the 3.2 should be fine.
    If the 4.1 is in your price range then go for it.

    also, check the optical vs.digital zoom specs for the camera.
    You will get better results with optical.

    Check this site,
    http://www.steves-digicams.com/
    they do a great job of rating cameras and accessories.

    good luck with your choice... :)
     


  3. hwyhobo

    hwyhobo

    1,426
    0
    Jun 3, 2003
    Silicon Valley
    First of all, what do you understand by "really big enlargements"? 8x10? If you take perfectly framed pictures every time you press the shutter release, then you can buy 3MP if you wish. I am not so perfect. I always end up changing the framing in postprocessing. Sometimes I end up with just a fragment of the original photo.

    My advice is, get whatever you can afford, it will not go to waste. These days when 5MP costs almost the same as 3MP, why would you penny-pinch yourself into a situation where you may lose some good shots?

    As to the shutter delay, the most expensive cameras don't have it. It will take a while before consumer gear is at the same level. And yes, www.dpreview.com does mention delay in their reviews.
     
  4. hile

    hile

    248
    0
    Sep 6, 2001
    Bucks County
    I agree with hwyhobo - I'd get 5MP. But then, my information comes from my sister who's a photog/digital artist. And what she considers "print quality" may be a LOT better than what the average person would consider print quality. So yeah, if it's not that much more, you may as well go with more resolution.