12.3 MP vs 18 MP

Yet again we see people repeating the mantra "More megapixels means worse image quality" as if endless repetition will make it come true. And that's despite the obvious evidence to the contrary.

Every DSLR I've owned (and I'm on my fifth) has had more MP than the previous model. Every DSLR I've owned has had better image quality than its predecessor.

For a technical discussion, written by Daniel Browning, who obviously has a brain the size of a planet and knows far more about it than I do, try 'The understated utility of small pixels'
 
but a good lens makes a lot of difference though, i dont think people doubt that more mega pixel in theory makes a better image, but then ive taken what i and other percieve to be fantastic images on a 1100d which i have had printed and they are pretty damn good.

In saying that i do want to buy a 60d or 7d to make the images even better on large prints
 
If you doing landscapes and aren't needing superfast af speed then the D90 is a smaller, lighter & cheaper body using the 12mp sensor found in the D300. Your image quality will be near as dam it the same.

I suppose the Canon 7D is to the Nikon D300 as the Canon 60D (D60 is older worse Nikon! - why do they use similar but confusing model numbers!) is to theNikon D90 - ie using very comparable sensors but lesser af and build quality.

Give the Nikon D90 a thought!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top