sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

So it IS true - size really DOES matter??? :mrgreen:

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

Based strictly on my own experience it seems to me that for a given sensor size more, but smaller, pixels will give a sharper image whereas fewer, but larger, pixels will give better color rendition and higher ISO capability. My preferance would be that bigger is better. A large sensor with relatively large pixels. Don't forget the camera's processor. It also plays a major role.

ocbeyer Loc: Baltimore

Well, four thirds (4/3) applies to that particular sensors aspect ratio, 4x3.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Of these two choices, sensor size is more important for image quality, especially in lower light situations.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Depends on what you do with it? :lol:

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Interesting question and I will give you an answer based on my opinion.
The two most used sensors are full frame and the so called "cropped" sensor. Nikon calls the latter DX sensor.
I cannot speak on behalf of others but I have not seen that significant difference between full and cropped images. I am sure that murals will tell the difference but my largest enlargements seldom go beyond 13x19.
What is more important, the size of the sensor or the number of pixels? Another controversial area that has been addressed so many times and the controversy seems to be endless.
I own an old D2H, a professional camera that sports only 4.1 megapixels. Although Nikon introduced a new sensor with this camera that they called an LBCAST their claims about noise were false and the camera is a very poor low light performer. The pixels were large and fat capturing large amount of light and reproducing beautiful pastel colors that I always liked. Skin colors with the D2H are among the best of all my cameras and its AF most probably one of the best Nikon has made.
Enlargements from these 4.1 megapixels never let me down with excellent reproduction of details and colors. I still use this camera.
Modern sensors are rich in megapixels and today 24 megapixel sensors are not uncommon in entry level cameras.
Many will swear by many megapixels but I am not one of them. My most "modern" camera is a D7000 body that I like very much but it has been difficult for me to tweak its colors to my liking. The D7000 has 16.2 megapixels.
The D300 has only 12 but I do not see the difference compared to the D7000. The D70S has only 6 megapixels and the enlargements are excellent showing great details.
As I said, I cannot speak on behalf of anybody else but if you ask me I am going to say that 16 megapixels are a lot of pixels and most probably more than enough for the majority of applications.
Just my humble opinion.

jkm757 Loc: San Diego, Ca.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

The bigger the frame/sensor the better the picture. This not an inclusive listing. There are others out there with even larger sensors/frames. The amount of pixels has little bearing on image quality, rather just image size.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Actually Jerry is right. About 55 years ago, I worked in early TV stations and the current names come from that arena and era. They make no sense now.

tradergeorge Loc: Newport, Kentucky

I love the wonderful technology we have today. Back in the day, the "Gold Standard" was whether you could get a decent 8"x10" print from a shot. Now, we are discussing the merits of a sensor that can produce mural size rather than a "mere" 24"x36" poster size. And once you finish the argument about size vs pixel numbers, someone throws in the little electronic tricks the camera software does that basically puts the whole argument back to on of those "all other things being equal" discussions. Personally, I revel in it....Like host Craig Ferguson says, "It's a Great day in America" (and elsewhere)...:-)

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

...and what it is. :D

Sprocket Loc: Upstate New York

I own a DX (cropped sensor) 16MPS and I have been lucky enough to toy around with a full frame that is of less pixels. (It was about half) The full frame with less pixels was a lot better in dynamic range. It was also better in clarity when I blew them up as large as I could on my computer screen.
I think that the two are joined at the hip and work together with the recording technology in the camera. However my opinion is that the sensor size should trump the Megapixels for importance.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Mine is Great!!! But I want Larger!!!





Sensor that is....

dar_clicks Loc: Utah

The most important thing is to grab the camera that's handy and use it regularly!

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

^^^This is indeed very important! It's how we get better.