Episteme wrote:
> Some may find this interesting?
>
> http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/...ogues-posts-2/
>
>
> E.


Yeah, well, Pogue's test doesn't prove what he claims it proves, since
he used resized images from the same camera, instead of images from
three different cameras. So he actually tested the resizing software and
the printer quality, not the camera resolution. But using three
different cameras wouldn't prove much either, since they would also
differ in lenses, in exposure calculation software/hardware, and in CCD
quality.

The only valid test answers the question: Does this camera enable you to
do what you want to with it? Megapixel count is only one factor to
consider, and even though Pogue's test is invalid, it does make a valid
point: higher megapixel counts don't mean much for the vast majority of
people.

Actually, the fact that most cameras come with several resolution
settings, defaulted to the worst so that "you can take up 160 pictures"
causes more disappointment than anything else.

HTH