ultrazoom 5mp or 8mp

Hi,
i currently have a canon ixus and am looking to upgrade. i spend a lot of time doing sports,- kitesurfing, skiing etc, and would like to get some shots that can be printed A4 or 16*20.
most of the shots will be sea/snow background, and shot from a distance, so a high zoom is important. from the reviews i-ve read it-s not that clear about the possibilites of larger prints from a 5MP. there-s also a chance that i-ll need to crop some of the shot so would 8MP be advisable.
also a good burst mode would be a big advantage.
i-m looking at the canon powershot PRO1 or the powershot S2 IS. should i go for more zoom or more pixels? another option i-ve seen is the panasonic DMC FZ30, which has both, but is that bit more bulky, but i could live with it if it had great advantages.

any advice would be much appreciated,- thanks.

I'd say that you may be disappointed with a P&S ultrazoom, I have been.
I've tried the Minolta A1, the Konica Minolta A2, and the Panasonic FZ20.
Of the three, the only one that's worked realy wel has been the FZ20 and it has the best zoom.

But I have to say that none of them have a good burst mode.
A1 and A2 only 3 shots, then it takes around 1 1/4 minutes to save the pictures.
Panasonic will do 4 shots, and saves fa quicker.
The problem is that the viewfinder blanks out for far too long and if you're panning with the subject (like a skier) it's really easy to lose it and get pictures of empty background.

It's a balancing act, more pixels and the ISO speed will probably be lower. You will probably also see more noise in the shadows. Less pixels (and the same size sensor) and you will probably have higher ISO speeds, and less noise because the pixels are bigger and gather more light.
That's how it was with the A1 and A2 - the biggest difference for me was the electronic viewfinder resolution. But with all the problems with the A2, I found the A1 more reliable.

The FZ20 is great, it's the only camera my wife can use for F1 racing and get a car in the frame :)

Both the CCD-shifting IS on the Minoltas, and the in-lens IS on the Panasonic work well.

The controls on the Minoltas are far better, much less dancing through menus and multi-functions becsuse the Minolta has more knobs and buttons to fiddle with.

The Minoltas win on zoom speed, beucase it's a totally manual control, whereas the Panasonic hasa video camera liks electric driven zoom that has only one speed ... too slow. But the Panasonic has a far wider zoom range and is almost as useful as my 20D+400mm zoom at the long end.

#1 Casio 2800 3MP
#2 Minolta A1 5MP
#3 Konica A2 8MP
#4 Panasonic FZ20 5MP

Thanks,

the main reason i posted this query was because i'd read about the possible noise with 8mp cameras, and also had doubts about the blackout on the EVF.

i guess without spending a lot more on a camera it-s a compromise i-ll have to make.

one last question,- did you find a large improvement in noise by taking smaller resolution (5mp equivelant) photos on the panasonic rather than using the full 8mp available?

nice photos by the way! :)

Glad you like the photos.

I didn't try anything but the native resolution of the camera.
Taking an image that has 5MP on an 8MP camera didn't seem worth it.
You don't get the benefit of having the larger pixels, because it's still the same sensor with the same small pixels (assuming the same sensor size like the A1/A2) then there's little point.

You considered buying a digital SLR? Cameras like the Canon Rebel XT, and the Nikon D50 have reasonable prices, and have optical viewfinders, which won't go blank too much time. Of course, they are more complicated, and bigger, also.

Of course, an ultra-zoom on a SLR will cost you a very big amount of money, but you really need all the range at the same time? Maybe you can buy a zoom in the telephoto range, and another one with a wide angle range. The kit lens might be sufficient for the later.

i've had a look at digital SLR's, and it's the price but also the size that's putting me off. at the end of the day it needs to be fairly portable,- especially for the skiing. i'm looking to get some really good shots, but purely as a hobby, the shots being of friends. i think a full on SLR will add to the hassle and so take away some of the pleasure. i might be wrong, but for me an SLR is more for the future if all goes well with an ultrazoom.