4008-MegxonC480

Woodchuck Bill wrote:

I'm torn between the Coolpix 8400 and the 8800.

I have the 8400. I don't have any good samples of my own to post yet,
but here are some good ones ...

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/re...11/02/373.html

"Jan Ishikawa" wrote in
:

I have the 8400. I don't have any good samples of my own to post yet,
but here are some good ones ...

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/re...11/02/373.html

Thanks for the link.

--
Bill

Woodchuck Bill wrote:
[]
5MP is decent. I get tack-sharp 5 X 7's from my Coolpix 5700, but 8 X
10's leave something to be desired. Not bad, but not 300 PPI which is
considered by most people to approximate "photo quality". I'm not
talking about soft images..I'm referring to images that appear sharp
on screen.

My next camera will probably be 7 or 8 megapixels to give me that
extra cropping flexibility, and to allow for the occasional *big*
enlargement with optimum results. I'm torn between the Coolpix 8400
and the 8800. I haven't figured out which end is more important to
me..wide or telephoto.

I've just printed a Nikon 990 image (3.3MP) at A4 size (210 x 297mm) and
the results (to me) were outstanding - it beat the olf 35mm kit with its
28 - 200mm zoom lens. I had always been been put off by people saying you
couldn't get away with this. Of course, these A4 prints are not intended
to be examined with a magnifying glass!

Yes, of course, 8MP then gives you either better quality, or more cropping
ability.

Why not get /both/ the Nikon 8400 and the 8800 if you can't decide
(although I feel that the FZ20 is a more useful camera than the 8800
because of the larger aperture at full telephoto). I'm very please with
both.

Cheers,
David