Cool. Yes, I didin't know that more pixels didn't equal better. I thought the lowest number of pixels to get was 8, so this is a pleasant surprise for me. I can start looking at cameras I wouldn't have considered before. <br><br>Wheeew<br><br><b><i>hiker97@aol.com</i></b> wrote:<blockquote class="replbq" style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"> <wbr>Wheeeeeeeew writes: :-) Is it worth it to spend more on a camera with 6 or 7 megapixels of resolution versus one with 5?<br> <br> A: Not necessarily, unless you're cropping in tightly on images or making poster-size prints. More megapixels usually translates into more picture detail. But beyond 5, you're unlikely to see the difference, even with 8x10 prints. Our advice: a 5-megapixel camera should provide all the resolution an average person needs. For posters, get at least 7 megapixels.<br>
-----------------------------<br> Switchback replies: All I can say is the the Long Suffering Mrs. Swithcback has a poster size making printer and an 8 MP camera. She has won Honor Mention in some photo contests with this combination. She has her own "dark room" set up in our house and is really into photography.<div class="AOLPromoFooter"> <hr style="margin-top: 10px;"> More new features than ever. Check out the new <a href="http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?ncid=aolcmp00050000000003" target="_blank">AOL Mail</a>!<br> </div> </blockquote><br><BR><BR>-Wheeew-<br>www.trailjournals.com/wheeew/<br>---->MexiCan----> 2008<p> 
<hr size=1>Never miss a thing. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs"> Make Yahoo your homepage.</a>