I have a 2.1 megapixel Canon A40, and printed pics from CVS are magnificent. I use Nero to make slide shows with music of these same stills. The on-screen pictures have OK resolution but I'm wondering how much better they might look with a higher resolution camera. Anyone have feedback? I'm considering a 6 megapixel camera for future slide shows. Bill
The higher the number of pixels, the larger you can print to without showing too much pixalation. If your current camera has a decent glass lens (and not a plastic) one, you will get a decent slideshow as long as you are not showing this on a projection or a large LCD screen.
It all depends on the resolution of the screen or projector you are using. Computer monitors are usually about: VGA Video Graphics Array 640 x 480, 320 x 200 XGA Extended Graphics Array 1024 x 768 SXGA Super Extended Graphics 1280 x 1024 UXGA Ultra Extended Graphics 1600 x 1200 WXGA Wide Extended Graphics 1366 x 768 WSXGA Wide Super Extended Graphics 1680 x 1050 WUXGA Wide Ultra Extended Graphics 1920 x 1200 After that you can see that if you are using a Computer screen, you do not need much. I found this: http://www.pixagogo.com/tutorials/digitalphotography/Tutorials.aspx?p=MegaPixelsResolution As you will see, you do not need much in terms of Megapixles for this application. Printing large photos in a high resolution is another matter. 2.1 megs for computer work should do. That's my take. JG p.s. If you really want to get confused! http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/vidres.htm
The fact that digital camears at 5MP are coming down in price, I dont see why it wouldnt benefit you to try a high MP camera. I would recommend the Canon IS S2 espacially since the S3 is out. The prices on the S2 have dropped like crazy and you will get great quality photos for a beginner ( if that is how you consider yourself).
