Question about mega-pixels and resolution configuration...please...

[Adsos Letter]

Okay...I'm confused, but I told my wife I had a good resource... :think:

My wife has been tasked with purchasing cameras for the pediatrics clinic she manages... :hide:

The specs she was given were for something like a Canon Sureshot, 5-6 mega-pixel, configurable at 1024 x 768, or 1600 x 1200 resolution, which Canon apparently no longer manufactures... :o

My pictures are always limited by the fact that I don't really understand the science of photography...such as this esoteric "resolution" of which she speaks... :dunce: .

Apparently the desire for a low mega-pixel camera has something to do with the transmission of data into a larger system... :freak:

She asked me if an 8 mega-pixel can be made to perform as a 5-6 megapixel...without breaking something... :crazy:

Or...does anyone still make good quality cameras in the 5-6 mega-pixel range?

My humiliation is now complete; however, if the photo group can help us figure out what-in-the-hell we are trying to do, it might get me off the hook for some of the time I've spent on DU over the last couple years... :scared:

[ConsAreLiars]

1. Megapixel numbers just refer to the dimensions of the image produced.

For example, a digital image that was 3000 pixels wide X 2000 pixels high would be 6 million pixels total. But it would be (I'll pass on doing the math) maybe 25-50 Megabytes in size. Not something that would be appropriate for web viewing, and not what they really want. I'd suggest she ask for more clarification.

As for camera options, the digital cameras that offer bigger-than-that sizes than needed will also offer smaller sizes. Pre-configure them to use that as a default and stick a post-it on them to remind the users of the proper setting.

[NashVegas]

2. The Question For Your Wife: "How Much Time Do You Want to Spend Messing With It?"

Is she the one who's going to be doing the editing and uploading, or someone else?

An easy solution is to find a 5mp with a 4/3 format ratio and give them exactly what they want. That may require more shopping time, but it's a ONE TIME task.

Getting a higher mp camera with a different default format (5/4, 3/2) will require extra time to crop and size down every single time you use it.

It sounds like they have a specific program they are using and want something that conforms exactly.

[dbmk]

3. A link

You could go here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp

You probably want to pick Compact as the Format (first option), and then set Effective pixels to either <6 million or 6-8 million pixels.
Leave the rest as is, unless you spot something thats vital to the decision.

That will list all the ones (in their database) that fits that, side by side (notice that there can be more than one page of results) - and in that list you can se what resolutions are optional on the camera (listed next to "Low resolution" ). You can't search by that as far as I can tell. So you might still want look the among the cameras of higher Effective pixels numbers, as they might be configurable to the needed resolution.

Thats the best option I can find just now.

Seems like the Canon Powershot A460 and 450, or the Nikon Coolpix L11 could fit fx. Which should not be construed as any form of recommendation. I would not able to tell if they are any good, but there are stars there to guide you also. :)

[Adsos Letter]

4. Thanks ConsAreLiars, Crisco, and dbmk...

You have convinced me that there are more questions to be asked, and given me ways to research. :toast:

And I appear to be off the hook for my DU time...

[pipoman]

5. It sounds like

they don't want to transmit huge files around. Most cameras have different image quality settings. For instance my Canon will record in large (15.1 megapixel), medium (8 megapixel), or small (3.7 megapixel). I think my son's Canon 590 P&S will do the same.