OK, was just browsing the menu on my D80 and looked at the size settings for photos. I currently, and have nearly always, have it set on 'medium' purely because the large ones take up more room on my memory card and on my pc and are unecessarily large. I noticed just now though that there are figures next to it as follows:

Large 9872x2592/10.0M

Medium 2896x1944/5.6M

Small 1936x1296/2.5M

What do the 10M, 5.6M, 2.5M mean?

TIA - I CBA RTFM HTH KTHXBYE

Eh?

I'll have two large ones please.

The xM figures are the number of megapixels that make up the picture....

Chris

Yeah, it takes smaller pictures by using a small section of the sensor. Nice camera (I've got one of those;))

They'll be the MegaPixel (MP) equivalents of the image.

ie its a 10MP camera but by shooting in medium you are effectively using it as a 5.6MP camera (2896x1944=5629824pixels)

damn, beaten twice.

See I did think it may be pixels, but I thought thats what the 'fine' etc settings were for?

the detail settings are for compression... the file size will be bigger if you use fine setting over something more coarse... of course its irrelevent if you use RAW format... remember jpg pictures are compressed anyway.

Yes Colin, I know Thats why I stepped the physical size down to compensate

Yes Colin, I know Thats why I stepped the physical size down to compensate

So whats the point of having a expensive camera at 5mpx if you have a phone with 5mpx and a ixus :P

and the above answer was lozzed down anyway for you to understand

I understand more aboutr cameras than you do Mr VR - which is why I can tell you that even running at half its power its better than the ixus because photography is all about the lenses!!

And if thats what it produces at half power, what will it be like on full?

So whats the point of having a expensive camera at 5mpx if you have a phone with 5mpx and a ixus :P

and the above answer was lozzed down anyway for you to understand

oh, and phone cameras are sh!t. the n95 is not a patch on my isux

p.s - 1. AN ixus

2. Your answer wasn't relevant to my initial question anyway, as I already knew

:popcorn:

So whats the point of having a expensive camera at 5mpx if you have a phone with 5mpx and a ixus :P

Ah a megapixel junkie :P

The big difference is the size (and quality) of the sensor as well as a better quality lens

Megapixels only really count if you're going to be blowing the photos up. 4-5 Mpixels is fine for A4....

Chris

The big difference is the size (and quality) of the sensor as well as a better quality lens

But that same high quality lens will record more detail using a higher MP sensor. So what use is being able to focus all the detail into the camera when you are only recording just over half of it?

Ideally you want to have a good quality lens, a high MP sensor and shoot in RAW format. And with how cheap Flash and HD space is nowadays it makes sense. I do all my shooting on full size RAW, even though 90% is only used at 72dpi web images.

Remember kids, you can always remove picture information, but you can't add it

But that same high quality lens will record more detail using a higher MP sensor. So what use is being able to focus all the detail into the camera when you are only recording just over half of it?

I was comparing like with like, but you could play the game of chasing the weakest component and upgrading it ad infinitum. I did an experiment when I got my SLR and took a picture with a 10Mpixel camera and the same with my humble 5Mpixel using the same lens, lighting, etc (in RAW and JPG) and I'm damned if I can see any difference between them either on the screen or printed. Sounds like I'll have to add upgraded eyes to my list too

Chris

I was comparing like with like, but you could play the game of chasing the weakest component and upgrading it ad infinitum. I did an experiment when I got my SLR and took a picture with a 10Mpixel camera and the same with my humble 5Mpixel using the same lens, lighting, etc (in RAW and JPG) and I'm damned if I can see any difference between them either on the screen or printed. Sounds like I'll have to add upgraded eyes to my list too

Chris

Now blow the picture up to A3 size, and you'll see the difference!

Phil

Now blow the picture up to A3 size, and you'll see the difference!

So the only reason for more megapixels is if I want to print pictures at A3? :rubchin:

Chris

Now blow the picture up to A3 size, and you'll see the difference!

Phil

Or heavily crop an image and enlarge it...

It's an older camera, but play with the rollovers on this page and tell me you can't see a difference?

Nikon D200 File Format Settings

What I was trying to say initially was if you alter the quality on separate setting (eg 'fine') what difference does the M bit make?

I guess it comes down to what you want from a camera. I want something which takes good pictures that I can just send to an A4 with no editing or monkeying around. If the only way I can notice the difference between my camera and an expensive camera is by printing on A3+ or zooming in on areas to compare miniscule details then I think I'll save my money

I also notice in his recommendation he says:

On my D200 I use JPG Large image size, BASIC quality, Optimal Image Quality mode. To me it looks the same as uncompressed NEF and only has a file size of 1.7MB.

Chris

The 'fine' setting is basically the JPEG compression level. If you have photoshop save some images as JPEG's and choose numbers around 10 (high) 5(Medium) and 1(Low) and see what they save like. That's basically what the detail levels on the camera do with the image. The physical size (pixels) is unchanged.

If you shoot RAW then the detail level is ignored.

Here's my car; on the left is a 400x400(0.16MP) image as is the one on the right. The left one is a JPEG on quality 100 (lowest compression - 'fine' on the camera) and the right is at quality 1 (an exaggerated 'low' or whatever it's called on Nikons) The images are the same size, but the 'fine' one has less JPEG artifacts and therefore more detail.

I guess it comes down to what you want from a camera. I want something which takes good pictures that I can just send to an A4 with no editing or monkeying around. If the only way I can notice the difference between my camera and an expensive camera is by printing on A3+ or zooming in on areas to compare miniscule details then I think I'll save my money

Fair enough, I was just saying there IS a difference. If you only need a 5MP camera, then don't buy a 10MP camera. But if you have a 10MP camera, I do not understand why you'd use it as a 5MP one?

When you take a photo and look at it later and feel cropping 50% out would make a better composition, with a 10MP image you can still have a cropped image at A4. With a 5MP one you possibly couldn't. So, personally, I'd shoot with the top resolution and quality and then crop/compress manually to get the photo I want to print/store.

If you're a point and shoot man, then you'd buy a different camera. Possibly not a DSLR though.

Mort - I get the first bit, thanks - but that bit with your car I think has gone over my head tbh :confused: I'll read it again when I have more time.

My 5 mp is just a compact, I got the D80 as I wanted a DSLR. As said, I wont notice loads of difference by shooting on large over medium. I very rarely print out any pics I take. D80 still better quality lens etc and has more functions. I've set it to large now anyway to have a go.

Mort - I get the first bit, thanks - but that bit with your car I think has gone over my head tbh :confused: I'll read it again when I have more time.

No problem, it's easier to think of it as a 'quality' setting. 'Fine' is better quality (but take up more space on the card) but the quality is independent of the size of the image (megapixels).

My 5 mp is just a compact, I got the D80 as I wanted a DSLR. As said, I wont notice loads of difference by shooting on large over medium. I very rarely print out any pics I take. D80 still better quality lens etc and has more functions. I've set it to large now anyway to have a go.

As I've said, it's not so much 'quality' that makes me shoot large pics, but the fact that it means you have the biggest, most detailed, original possible which gives you a lot more scope to play with and edit/crop etc. If you don't really manipulate the images after you take them (or expect to print them large) then smaller images mean a saving on storage space and may seem a better idea.