Differences in megapixels... important?

[Gyro]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to get a DSLR for outdoor action photography, more often than not at the beach. I'm a beginner, and I'm looking to either get a Nikon D40 or D40x. There's a significant difference in price, which would mean a significant difference in time before I can afford it.

My question to you all is:

Someone I know told me that megapixels are essentially just a marketing scheme, and that the 4.1 mp difference between the D40 and D40x wouldn't really make a difference unless I was to blow up a picture. Is this true? Or is there a noticeable difference regardless of blown-up prints?

[deckcadet]

It's pretty similar in all honesty. The D40 has fantastic acuity- remember it isn't just quantity, but quality of pixels even in DSLRs- and renders a ton of detail. A D40 will output images at 3008x2000 pixels, while the D40x will output at 3872x2592 pixels. In terms of linear resolution, you get about 28% more pixels you can crop out in either dimension and get the same print size. Either will be sharp and both are good at high ISO.

Now it isn't all just marketing hoopla, megapixels do matter, but for most hobbyists it won't be a big difference. The Nikon D2Hs was only 4.1mp, but it had such good quality sensor and processing electronics that it held up like it was a 6+mp camera. I printed from my D2Hs bigger than I ever printed from the D70.

[Gyro]

Okay, that's very helpful, thank you!

But I'm a little confused. You said even very low mp cameras, like the D2Hs, can still have great quality just because of the electronics. But since the D40 and D40x are pretty much the same camera, would that many megapixels create a noticeable difference at least in these 2 cameras?

And by the way, nice signature deckcadet

[Xia_Ke]

Hi Gyro, welcome to PR I'm not going to get into the megapixel debate but, click HERE, HERE, or HERE for several interesting articles on the importance of megapixels. I'm assuming since you are looking at the D40, that a budget comes into play at least to a certain extent. Looking at B&H, a D40x with 18-55 will run you $619.95, while you can get a D40 with 18-55 and 55-200 for only $559.95 right now. I would be much more inclined to get the regular D40 kit with 2 lenses and spend the difference on memory cards or spare battery or good tripod or...

[Gyro]

Thank you for those articles.

And I guess I should have said this earlier, but my budget won't really come into play in this decision. It would take forever to save up for a 40D or D80 or the like, but between these two cameras, it's not a big deal. If I need to spend more money to get what I want, I just have to wait a little longer in order to make the money. So I understand how I could use the saved money on extra lenses and flashes and memory and whatnot, but if there's a huge difference in the picture quality of the two cameras, I'd rather just get the better one regardless of the price difference... however after reading those articles I see that there really won't be a difference in normal sized prints.

Alright, so one last question... if I were to get something printed to maybe the size of a medium to large poster, would there then be a difference in photo quality with this difference in megapixel count?

[Xia_Ke]

I wouldn't worry about it. You would be hard pressed to pick out the differences. Click HERE or HERE to compare image quality. You would be better off taking the money you save and putting it towards Photoshop Elements or another editing program for fine tweaking.

[Gyro]

Okay, I'm convinced. Thank you for all the information. I'll just be getting the regular D40 and using the extra money for accessories.

[Xia_Ke]

Glad to hear it, you won't be disappointed. Don't forget to show us some pics though once you get it :thumbsup:

Happy Shooting,
Aaron

[Gyro]

Yea, most definitely. Now that I know exactly what I'm saving up for, I should have the money before the close of December, so I'll definitely show some of my beginner photography, and make you all feel better as photographers

Aaron (yea, we share names)

[Xia_Ke]

No worries, we are still learning all the time and hey, everyone has to start somewhere. I was thinking about something though. I took a look on B&H again, and as you are interested in shooting action, another option might be to get the D40 with just the 18-55mm lens and save up and get the 55-200mm VR. The VR will definitely help you with when it comes to action shots.

[deckcadet]

Okay, that's very helpful, thank you!

But I'm a little confused. You said even very low mp cameras, like the D2Hs, can still have great quality just because of the electronics. But since the D40 and D40x are pretty much the same camera, would that many megapixels create a noticeable difference at least in these 2 cameras?

And by the way, nice signature deckcadet

Thanks ;)

Even though you already made your decision, it merits an answer. Mechanically they are the same camera for all intents and purposes. They do, however, have different sensors, and therefore their processing programming and some electronic components are not exactly the same.

The D40 sensor is the product of a design that has been evolving for something like 6 years. Its earliest predecessor hit the market in the D100 back in early 2002. Every generation of camera it showed up in, there were noticeable improvements both in the sensor's quality and the processing that the images would receive. It's probably as close to perfect as today's technology can make that design at a reasonable price point.

The D40x sensor is more expensive and a more recent design, but it's had less time to be perfected. I don't doubt that the 10mp chip that first showed up in the D80 as a modified version of the D200 sensor will be improved for a few more years and will get cheaper and cheaper and be the standard low-cost DSLR sensor reasonably soon.

Each sensor does have its own strengths and weaknesses, and its own processing algorithms. The processing electronics are probably reasonably similar, but the D40x is capable of reading a larger amount of data at a faster rate, processing it, then outputting it.

[Gyro]

Aaron - That seems like a good idea. It is my impression that the VR would definitely help if the subjects were kind of spread out down the beach, and I might have to zoom alot to get some of the further away people. Is that correct?

deckcadet - So basically the D40 sensor, although not quite as good as the D40x, is more tried and tested, and probably has less kinks? Because reliability is definitely important...

[Franglais]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking to get a DSLR for outdoor action photography, more often than not at the beach. I'm a beginner, and I'm looking to either get a Nikon D40 or D40x. There's a significant difference in price, which would mean a significant difference in time before I can afford it.

My question to you all is:

Someone I know told me that megapixels are essentially just a marketing scheme, and that the 4.1 mp difference between the D40 and D40x wouldn't really make a difference unless I was to blow up a picture. Is this true? Or is there a noticeable difference regardless of blown-up prints?

I have the 6Mpix sensor in the D70 and the 10MPix sensor in the D200. On the largest prints I do (A3 = 13x19 inches) I can't see any difference. Note that I always print the entire image, if I cropped just a part then there might be a difference.

I haven't heard of any reliablity problems with the 10Mpix sensor. Usually any problems happen in the first 3 months.