Panasonic Lumix DMC-3D1
Canon IXUS 240 HS
Canon PowerShot SX240 HS
Nikon D800
Samsung DV300F
Nikon Coolpix P510
Canon PowerShot SX260 HS
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30
Nikon Coolpix S9300
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Year of the 8 Megapixel Digicam
Imaging Resource have confirmed the rumours by publishing a news story that more than hints at a number of 8 megapixel digital cameras being released in the next 6 months, hot on the heels of the Sony DSC-F828.
“As always at this time of year, we’re under NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) with essentially all the major digicam manufacturers. We know a lot of what’s coming over roughly the next 6 months, but can’t breathe a word of it to anyone.
Well, almost. While we can’t say anything about any individual manufacturer’s plans, it certainly doesn’t violate anything that we’ve signed to observe that 2004 is going to be the year of the 8 megapixel prosumer digicam.”
Website: Imaging Resource - NDA report: The 8 megapixels are coming!
Panasonic Lumix DMC-3D1 Review
Canon IXUS 240 HS Review
Canon PowerShot SX240 HS Review
Nikon D800 Review
Samsung DV300F Review
Nikon Coolpix P510
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30
Canon PowerShot SX260 HS
Fujifilm X-Pro1
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX200V
#1 SeanB
I guess we can expect to see some major announcements at the PMA show in February.
I would agree with the article that more pixels is not necessarily a good thing, particularly in the compact digicamera area. More pixels seems to equal more noise, more Chromatic Abberation (have I spelt that right??), and also bigger file sizes so less photo's on your flash card.
My Fuji602 produces very good quality 3 megapixel images that in turn produce very high standard prints upto 8x6 or 10x8, which is probably adequate for 99% of the general public. Better quality at high ISOs is probably more useful than more pixels in this case.
However more pixels will be good news for anyone producing big enlargements. I would expect Canon can put 8 megapixels on there CMOS sensors used in the 300D and 10D without too much difficulty, and with probably only a slight reduction in quality at the higher ISO settings.
cheers
Sean
2:20 pm - Saturday, January 10, 2004
#2 Neil Lavitt
One thing I do dislike about digital photogrpahy is the megapixel game. It is such a boon for the camara manuafacturers - how many cameras have been upgraded every 1 to 2 years as opposed to say 5 years for a film camera?
The only thing that I will consider an upgrade to from my 300D is a full frame 12 mpixel+ version of the 10D or 300D. I'd say that 2 to 3 years will see that realised.
Frankly while I can see the Sony 828 has some good optics, I also see some real noise issues - the one thing that the 10D/300D avoids.
8:50 pm - Saturday, January 10, 2004
#3 maglev
Hi, everyone. Iīm new here and have posted a couple of photos for the "photo of the week" and "competition". I agree with Neilīs comment on this post, what we need are bigger pixels(photosites) not more megapixels. Iīve been taking photos with my old Olympus C2020Z for a while (canīt wait to get a D-SLR!) and have even managed to print some really nice 24x17 ilfochromes, albeit with tons of Photoshop work.
12:07 am - Sunday, January 11, 2004
#4 Mark Goldstein
Some digital camera models seem to have been upgraded every 6 months to accomodate the latest sensor, particularly with the jump from 4 to 5 megapixels. Quite a few 5 megapixel models suffer from noise, so who knows what will happen with the upcoming 8 megapixel cameras.
5:18 pm - Sunday, January 11, 2004
#5 Mark Goldstein
Is that a 2 megapixel digital camera maglev?!! And to think I was worrying about getting a 30x20" print from a EOS 10D file
5:21 pm - Sunday, January 11, 2004
#6 maglev
Thatīs right Mark, I resample to 3200 x 2400 (slowly and with extra software), work on them in Photoshop, then I have 4x5 slides made from the files and then have the ilfochromes made from that. A lot work, but it can be done and I have sold a few of those prints. Iīve found that more than sheer resolution what I need is low noise and sharp pictures. The lens on the Olympus C2020Z (35-105 mm f/2-2.8) is superb, believe me, my other camera is a Leica R7 with some nice glass and I hardly ever use it anymore, I hate scanning!
Cheers, and congratulations on a great site!
11:01 pm - Sunday, January 11, 2004
#7 Mark Goldstein
Have you tried having digital prints made from the same files to see how they compare to the ilfochromes?
11:32 am - Monday, January 12, 2004
#8 maglev
Yes I have Mark and some are very good, but the Ilfochromes have a depth and "brilliance"(donīt know how else to call it) that the prints canīt match. This also makes up for the loss of sharpness, after all, they are blow-ups of a very small file. There is quite a difference between the inkjets and the ilfochromes in the way they show grain (or noise), the ilfochromes being much smoother. I can only wonder what a low-noise, hi-res image image from a 10D can yield on an Ilfochrome print.
1:15 pm - Monday, January 12, 2004
#9 Mark Goldstein
I might have to try is sometime, although I am more than satisfied with the digital prints that I've been getting from the likes of Photobox.co.uk and Peak-Imaging.com. How much does it cost roughly to get a slide and ilfochrome made?
1:20 pm - Monday, January 12, 2004
#10 maglev
I live in Venezuela, South America so I donīt know how these prices relate to the UK. Last time I did this, about 6 or 7 months ago I paid US$40 for the 16x24 print and US$10 for the 4x5 slide. I believe a search on the net might give you more up to date prices in the UK. I know that in the US you can make ilfochromes directly from a digital file. I have done all this more for trying to find out the limits of my 2 megapixel images than anything else, but Iīve also found that the end product is very worthy of the time, effort and money invested. The quality of Ilfochromes is amazing to say the least.
2:03 pm - Monday, January 12, 2004