I found this an interesting article in today's NY Times. Log In Registration is free to view article.
Digital

Bob

I tried to register about a dozen times without success. Maybe the machine realizes I'm a Red Sox fan. It's too bad because I would have liked to read the article since I have an eight megapixel camera.

:rolleyes: Bob :rolleyes:

I sent Bob M. a copy of article and could do the same for anyone else that's interested.
Bob

I'm looking for feedback from 8 megapixel users. Do you save the large file, shoot at a lower size, relate the quality of picture to pixels or think a lower megapixel photo might have same or better quality? Larger megapixel means you can produce clear poster size pictures but is the quality of smaller sizes effected. Let me know your opinions of what you have or have experienced. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

rscoop,

For what is worth: I have a D100 (6 mpxl), and now a D2H (4 mpxl). Both produce outstanding images.

My rule of thumb is always shoot as large as possible and in NEF format (Nikon's native RAW format). This allows you full control for editing and keep the original prestine.

As for poster size prints, I took a 6 mpxl image and made a 36" x 48" poster of it on our plotter/printer at work. It came out tack sharp, even up close. It was even more impressive from a distance.

I really like my new Olympus Evolt E-300. I just had some photos printed at the local drug store and they were some of the clearest colorful pics I've had with digital cameras. The files are extremely large and the clarity of the prints show it.

One of the many selling points of this 8 megapixel SLR camera is clarity in prints up to 20 x 30". I've never had a pic enlarged to that size but if the right pic comes along I may do just that.

I love the fact that I have two zoom lenses for this camera covering me from 28mm to 300mm in 35mm terms. It really changes my capabilities from my older 4.0 megapixel camera.

Bob

That's my exact dilema that your speaking to, Lighthouse Joe. I'm looking at the Nikon D100 and the D2H cameras, and am half expecting Nikon to upgrade both of these shortly since the $200 rebate is now in effect. What size and speed lenses are you using for your long distance photos. Are they Nikkor lenses or Sigma, and what is your opinion about lenses. Mine is if your going to pay for a high end Nikon camera, you better be able to afford the Nikon lenses.
Bob

Bob,

Here is my list:
Nikon D100 w/MB-D100
Nikon D2H (new)
Promaster AF 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 MC
Nikkor AF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 D IF
Nikkor AF 80-200 f/2.8 D ED (2-touch)
Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 HSM APO EX (new)
Nikkor 500mm f/8 N Reflex AI-S
Rubinar 500mm f/5.6 Reflex
Tamron AFD 1.4x TC
Kenko-Tokina AFD 2x Teleplus MC7

Most of my shots were taken with the D100 and either the Nikkor 28-105 and 80-200. There were a few shots taken with the Nikor 500 and a few wides with the Promaster.

I bought the D2H 2 weeks ago. Three days after I bought it, Nikon announced its replacement, the D2HS. But for the $1500 difference, I'll keep the D2H. I haven't had much of a chance to use it yet. If you really have money to burn, get the new D2X. 12 mpxls with more bells and whistles you can shake a stick at. Its only $5000 for the body.

Nikon makes some great glass, sharp, fast, and expensive. Sigma makes good lenses too. Just slightly behind Nikon in sharpness and quality IMHO, but much more reasonable prices. Since I shoot digital, I can make up for it in post processing. I don't really have any LH shots using the Sigma 120-300 yet, but I have lacrosse shots using it. Go to http://home.comcast.net/~joewingsphotos/ and look at the top 3 games. The were all shot using the Sigma. The last game was shot using the Nikon 80-200. For more from the Nikon 80-200 go to http://home.comcast.net/~nllbeagle/belmar04/ if you like pro beach volleyball. I can tell you the D100 and D2H are great cameras.

If you really need more pixels, you can always up-sample the image using programs like Genuine Fractals.

Keep in mind one thing... The camera is only a tool. It only captures what the photographer tells it to.

Joe---
Nicw lens list, and your camera selection sounds familiar. I started digitally two years ago with a D1, updated in September with a D100, but found the focusing and frame rate too slow, so I found a D2H on ebay, unfortunately it was a month before the price drop. But I've put it to full use and I couldn't be happier.
As for the enlargement size, since I shoot much of my stuff for my town's high school yearbook, I'm shooting in basic. The photos will run very small in the book. However, when I want archival beauty shots, I shoot with the D100 on large Fine jpegs. I recently enlarged a shot of our Plum Beach Lighthouse in 40"x60" for a display at the Providence Boat show and it was beautiful. Don't let anyone kid you that 6 million pixels aren't enough, they are more than enough.

Thanks lh Joe and Dave, just the feedback I was looking for.
Bob