Car Audio Central - Ultimate Car Audio Forum and Community

the Z10 for $130

which one did you get?

Over the weekend while I was at the lake I took a picture of the lighthouse and a picture of my motorcycle along the beach.

Yesterday I took a picture of my dads '69 Z28...

Went into Walgreens and had them developed. Did an 8x10 of the lighthouse and 4x6 of the bike and car.

The lighthouse came out really really nice, but a tad dark... Need to lighten it up next time. The car and bike... Oh wow!

:sm29:

For $130 Im going to keep it. With the results Im getting its hard to justify another $270...

Actually I have the Digital camera magazine for october in pdf format if u want me to email it to you. I'm sure it has some good information in it.

look at megapixels as the amount of detail at any given size, and the max size.

dont think of it as a "max rating" but you probably wont notice a difference between 4, and 5.

from experience, a 3.2 puts out beautiful 6x4 pictures.

there are 3 speeds. not too much difference though.

[quote="Basstronics"]
1) Does anyone know of a chart breakdown for like pixels into printable area? Say like 3.2 MP= 13 1/2x10 1/2"
[/quote]
I don't know of a chart, but the resolution will give you an idea. If you have Photoshop, just make a new document and type in the pixels, then select inches. I'd do it right now, but I'm not in reach of Photoshop.

[quote="Basstronics"]
2) Going off the above example. If I print that 3.2 to an 8"x10" and then say compare to another camera with only difference a higher MP- say 8. Will they be the same quality overall? My understanding is that the MP is simply a size. The bigger the size, the more the MP. Now if you shrink a large size down (8 to 3.2) is there some quality retention or what?
[/quote]
Basically, the higher the resolution, the better the quality when it is shrunk down. So an 8 will look much better than a 3.2 if the 8 is shrunk to, say, the largest resolution a 3.2 can do.



I'm not a real fan of Compact Flash, I like SD's better. I recently got a 66x 512 meg for my 3.2 MP Canon. The speed difference is insane; Compact Flash doesn't have speeds as far as I know.

Hell yeah. I'd do the same thing when you're spending that much money.They make Compact Flash Cards up to 6gb or so I've heard, haven't seen one yet that big. The largest SD Flash Card I've seen is 1gb. I have a 1gb Compact Flash card for my handheld...I could always use that if I needed a lot of space. But just normal picture taking, I can get a good 100 or so pictures on my 256mb card.

Ouch...

I seen the largest SD card at walmart was 512...

Hmmm...

Well I think im going to buy the Konica minolta Z10 and give it a try. Take a few pictures. Take it in and print them. If Im not happy with the quality then I will just return it. They have no sure fire way of knowing, so I guess trying is the only way :D

supposedly pixel ratings are like max power ratings...don't trust them. i am not much of a digi camera junkie, but my friend is and that's how he explained it. as far as printers go.....those printers print up to/around 5000 dpi. you can get smaller printers like them for home use now days, they arent too expensive either. a camera with 4-6MP will be fine for what you're looking to do. i know that most 6mp cameras can be blown up to like 24x24 or something like that. i do not believe there is a chart breakdown for pixels into printable area. like i said, it's inconsistant.

my 5MP Nikon could easily be blown up to 8x10. also realize when you take a picture with the highest image quuality setting, your pictures end up being several MB, so you use up whatever card you have VERY quickly. i have a 256mb flash card, on its highest image quality setting, i can only take 16 pictures...u do the math.