Usually more is worse; it's the marketing department that has people hooked on more.
If you're willing to spend about $50 more than the Sony, I'd recommend the Canon S95. What makes it better? One, a slightly bigger sensor with fewer MP; this allows it to capture sharper images with less noise. Two, it has a wider aperture lens allowing in more light; this lets the camera use lower ISO, which also leads to sharper images with less noise. Three, it shoots in RAW, so there is much easier to tweak white balance, hue, saturation, etc. Many serious photographers with DSLR use the S95 as a pocketable 2nd camera.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/PS95/PS95A.HTM
You can also get the S95 refurbished direct from Canon for about $320: http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_276388_-1
Hello,
I have a unique problem where I photograph art in my studio. I have a Kodak EasyShare C875 digital camera (8MP) that has worked well for years, despite a bit of color correction sometimes required with Photoshop. Otherwise the images taken are crystal clear and sharp.
The problem is I want to upgrade to 16MP and every camera I have tried has produced images, under the same lighting situation as above, that look washed out, a bit on the yellow tint and not as clear or sharp as the Kodak.
I have tried the following models on every setting you can imagine. I am not a novice photographer so I think I have tried all the manual settings too, every single way of focusing, etc...
Sony 16 Megapixel Cyber-shot DSC-HX9V (flat art looks smooth in detail, not sharp focus and some areas of the art are clearly out of focus in the same picture).
Panasonic 16 Megapixel DMC-FH25K (slightly smooth, not sharp details and washed out colors).
So... am I missing something? Are the 16MP cameras just not up to par? Is there some sacrifice in image sharpness for the higher megapixel models?
- very frustrated

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic