I got a Nikon d70 digital SLR 6MP on the basis that the sensor is larger
than the 8mp models even if it's fewer pixels. I'm not really qualified
to judge but it seems to me the pics are a bit fuzzy and do not compare
to the amazing detail of the 8MP digicams I saw. Another thing I was
told is that the metering sensors was way more advanced than the 8MP
prosumer cams and I guess I'm hoping it has a better dynamic range and
is basically more sensitive and responsive to difficult situations due
to the larger sensor. It cost $1000 for the body but then with a lense &
extra batteries, a 2g Microdrive that more than doubled the cost. I
think I was told that the raw files are more capable of being enlarged
than an 8MP though I don't know about that. Another consideration is
that the 8MP models are pushing the limit and they have some problems
like purple fringing on high contrast edges which is really very
annoying and noise level for night shots can be pretty bad for the 8MP
prosumer models. I've found that if I just barely get a bad picture in
tough lighting with this camera I can process it is photoshop to an
amazing degree because there is a lot less noise & the quality is there
to work with. This guy has a decent optical viewfinder like a 35mm &
it's super fast and light on battery usage so it's no problem to shoot
400 pics in a day-long excusion with room for another couple hundred
pics if something else came up.


¤T¸}¤j«L wrote:
From my experience it depends on *whose* 8MP are you referring to. A 8MP
JPEG (not talking about RAW) produces by 1DM2 far far far better result than
a 8MP output from those "prosumer" DC like even Olympus 8080 or Canon Pro 1.
Take a few pictures with both sides and you'll know what I'm talking about.

And I don't think those "prosumer" produced better image than my Nikkor +
Fuji.


"Matt" .. .

I heard someone say that 8Mp digital cameras were the equivalent to 35mm
film quality?

Does this mean they have the theoretical equivalent resolution? Are they
the equivalent to 35mm?