Digital Camera's, pixals, resolution, sensor size and types,
by radwjw - 12/19/09 2:44 PM
In Reply to: Mega Mega Pixels by leehemen
I do not believe that i have every read so many erronous, misleading, illogical, and just plain wrong posts in the entire time that I've spent reading CNET. I do not even know where to begin, so I will not even try. Perhaps the editor can find the time to correct the over 25 completely wrong statements contained in these posts; it really WILL take that much time to explain everything. Furthermore it fascinates me to hear amateurs state that "I could not tell any difference.." or "...and it came out great" when it has been my entire professional experience to find that MOST people couldn't tell a properly exposed, composed, and executed Photograph with good color balance, contrast, s/n ratio, etc. if their life depended on it. I cannot begin to tell of the number of prints I've seen with terrible color balance, faces saturated with magenta or cyan, or people/places/things clipped off, etc. or WHATEVER that has been shown to me and Ive been asked Great shot huh?. So hold your tongue unless you have a clue. Photography is an art, a science, and takes years, if not decades, to master. Being a salesman or taking "pictures" at Thanksgiving doesn't cut it. The fact that people actually use their camera phones for "Photography" says it all. That's like driving a Chrysler "K" car your whole life and discussing racing car air dynamics, engine design, etc., or shooting bottle rockets on July fourth and thinking you could work at NASA. No one would even attempt it, yet for some reason "everyone is a photographer".
I am not being a know it all jerk critic here either. Just dont talk about what you basically know little about and think that you are an expert, or post answers to complex questions that you do not have the knowledge base, experience, etc. to answer correctly; it does everyone a disservice. I also am not saying that smart-phone cameras or point and shoots dont have a perfectly valid place in our lives. They are fine, and most likely the proper choice, for a lot of people given what these individuals use them for, or want to do with them. On the other hand, just because A can have the endpoint of a visual reproduction/experience and so does B, that does not mean both are agents of photography. Perhaps we should be using the phrase pictures. The same goes for driving to work versus racing at Daytona; just because an automobile is involved in both does not make them even remotely the same experience. For each his/her own, to have fun and fulfill a purpose, and the question was about megapixels, which is like asking about horsepower in an automobile to extend the analogy. Horsepower doesnt mean much if chassis design, transmission, tires, suspension, and on and on are also simultaneous discussed, and also if the intent of use is also discussed as to whether horsepower is being analyzed from a race car perspective or from a drive to the local store perspective.
So essentially the base question was inappropriate; no answer would suffice without getting into sensors, lenses, and on and on. Perhaps better if it was asked I need a camera for the purpose of _____. What should I look for? Then because the question was well thought out and logical all the answers contemplated would probably have made more sense. For example it is far easier to answer what is good for snapshots of ones friends partying or what is good for a once in a life time vacation, with additional knowledge of that persons experience, ability to acquire more knowledge and apply it appropriately, etc. If we do not know what the original questioner wished to use their camera for then it is impossible to give them a qualified, dignified, intelligent answer.
Was this reply helpful? (0) (0)