The higher the megapixels, the larger the photo can be printed and still maintain photolab quality. Imagine a 20"x30" picture with the same quality as a glossy 5x7.
I am no expert, when it comes to photography, but I was wondering what the advantage is of having a higher number of mega pixels?
Is it only of good use, if you have one hell of a good printer?
My thinking is this... I have a 3.2 Mega Pixel camera (Fuji S3000) and when I take a photo, usually using 1 Mega pixel setting, it comes out massive on the computer, because of the number of pixels it uses. I then have to reduce it down, to print it on one page.
If I have to do that (Using an Epson CX3200 printer) I presume it's because the printer doesn't print that many pixels.
Therefore, if I were to then take a picture at 3 Mega pixels, I would get a bigger picture, which I would then have to reduce to exactly the same size, to print it.
More than that, I would imagine that reducing from (for example) 3 mega pixels to 0.5 mega pixels would lose more quality than reducing from 1 mega pixels to 0.5 mega pixels.
So, this would mean that the higher the resolution of the original picture, the lesser the quality of the print.
So the question is... For the vast majority of people buying digital cameras, for use on normal computers, with normal printers, are a higher number of pixels just a pretty selling point, with no value to Joe public?
Just a thought.