Canon Digital Ixus 500 vs. Sony DSC P-93

Lifestyle Bazaar Talk
21

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
If someone is willing to shell out a 'couple of hundred more' for quality - but is unwilling to go to professional standard... then don't settle for anything less than Canon Rebel SLR for $999. Its only a 'couple of hundred' more than the Dimage.

For those whose feet are firmly on the ground, a 3MP is fine, as long as you are not planning to print posters.

yesterday, a friend of mine was debating between A75 and A80... the price difference was 100 bucks. I advised A75.
[/QUOTE]

Sure that sounds great. $999 isn't bad for a top of the line Digi-cam but heaps better than a crappy bargain 3MP. I am a big fan of Canon products. ;)

let me check if I'm planted firmly on the gorund. No, I'm floating. :p

22

yes.. provided the CCD size remains the same, the one with lower MP will have larger pixel size hence less noise.

23

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Femme Fatale: *
What is that fancy sony model they use in that commercial when the aerosmith guy is walking in or out of a restuarant and the girls r trying to take his pic?
[/QUOTE]

SONY Cybershot DSC-T1

24

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *

yes.. provided the CCD size remains the same, the one with lower MP will have larger pixel size hence less noise.
[/QUOTE]

LOL .. Isn't smaller more tightly packed pixels better? They give out a crisper and sharper pic?

Dude are you sure you know what your talking about? :D

25

dude smaller pixels give more noise.. and yes.. i know what i'm talking about.. do you?

26

WTF is noise man? You been yapping about noise andmore noise and you claim less MPs yield bteer pictures. Does’nt make any sense.

I’ve got a headache reading your factless replies. :smack2: :smack2: :smack2:

Alright man you WIN! I’ll buy a .5mp camera which according to your theory will take better pictures than a 5MP or even 10000000000MP. :slight_smile:

27

He wanted it right away, as he was flying off to Pakistan last night, so web options was not there. I think he ultimately ended up buying PowerShot SD110. Just 2x optical zoom, but he liked the size.

28

^^ Good decision. :k:

29

munnay yeh paRh loa aur tang na karo..

30

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *

SONY Cybershot DSC-T1
[/QUOTE]

thank you. Its bloody $500.00 :(

31

Uncle ji I would but I don’t have time for that. Thanks for doing the research for me though. :hehe:

32

It's true. I agree with PakistaniAbroad. Noise factor makes a big difference in determining the pixel strength.

If you want to save money, and are not a professional photographer for TIME Magazine or whatever, then 3MP is sufficient enough.

33

samael :hehe:

if you dunno what your talking about, keep quit :stuck_out_tongue:

34

Talking?

I'm simple asking for guidance oh great ones. I still refuse to believe what you guys say until i hear from a qualified professional not some guppies on a Paki board! :D:D:D:D:D

35

bohat Dheet ho :stuck_out_tongue:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm voila :smiley:
the MegaPixel Myth :stuck_out_tongue:

36

Nice discussion between you people. :D

Just wanted to let you know that I have ordered the Canon Digital Ixus 500 online now and will Inshallah get it next week.

Since it was too expensive here in Austria, I got it from a company in Germany, which also delivers to Austria.

Can´t wait to hold it in my hands. :)

37

Can someone please post pictures of the Canon IXUS? I don’t see it on the Canon website. Maybe it’s under a different name in North America? :confused:

38

Click here to see all the info about the camera.

I think the Ixus is called Elph in the US.

39

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Samael: *

LOL .. Isn't smaller more tightly packed pixels better? They give out a crisper and sharper pic?

Dude are you sure you know what your talking about? :D
[/QUOTE]

PakistaniAbroad was spot on their. Smaller pixel gets less light = poorer signal.

i think you are getting confused with the number of pixels. Something which has a 1cm square surface area CCD with 5 million pixels will not be totally better than a CCD of the same area with 3 million pixels. More noise will be visible on the 5M CCD as less light hits the individual pixel. However the picture will be sharper and if downsized to the same size as a 3M picture signal noise will be less visible so quality as good as a 3MP CCD. Hence high end DSLR camera have a much bigger CCD some the same size as a 35mm photo film. So each pixel gets more light hence better reproduction of colour. Also not as visible on low-mid range cameras is the quality of circuit design. A DLSR camera with a poor design regarding EMI shows though even though it may have a very good CCD and general spec. Canon been very good at reducing EMI as of late.

40

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Samael: *
Talking?

I'm simple asking for guidance oh great ones. I still refuse to believe what you guys say until i hear from a qualified professional not some guppies on a Paki board! :D:D:D:D:D
[/QUOTE]

Pakistanis chat a load of **** while white men know their stuff ?

if you want a qualified professional go to tour nearest large elctrical store and some white guy comes ask for help on CCD sizes and interferance. What ever is the most expensive will suit your needs regardless of quality. Chances are they wont know what size of CCD reults on picture quality.