Aqua-Soft ForumsI've been doing some research lately, with no success. What is the record for the most megapixels in a digital camera and how enormously huge is the picture/file size? 
50MP? 150MP?
=j
Where do the megapixels end?!
The last I heard of Highest MP in DSLR camera available was HassleBlad, with whopping 39MP. It's called H2D39.
You can read about it here : http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/h2d3...9&iLanguageID=1
Mind this but, that this camera is what available in market, besides BetterLight scanning back (144MP)
maybe this would throw some light : http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66898,00.html
Besides that I had read an article sometime back where some nerd scientists created array of Many DSLR cameras to create some gigapixel device for space photography. Unfortunately I don't remember where I read that and don't have a clue if it was on net or in some magazine. So I really don't have any more details on that.
I'd like to mention that more megapixels does not necessarly mean better quality photos. You still need a high quality lens to get good photos. One more thing is that some cameras use technology called 'Interpolation' (mostly in mobiles) some cameras use this to make pictures taken at a low resolution become higher. I used to have a Sony ericsson k700i which gave me pictures at 1280x1024 (which looked terrible) though they were actually taken at 1024x768 and just interpolated.
That's actually and unfortunately true, corpse89. MegaPixels are one those overhyped things.
Camera in cellphones... well I don't count them only. They suck really bigtime. Except, camera on my K750i does produce pretty decent results.. when not used the crappy digital zoom.
I'd like to mention that more megapixels does not necessarly mean better quality photos. You still need a high quality lens to get good photos. One more thing is that some cameras use technology called 'Interpolation' (mostly in mobiles) some cameras use this to make pictures taken at a low resolution become higher. I used to have a Sony ericsson k700i which gave me pictures at 1280x1024 (which looked terrible) though they were actually taken at 1024x768 and just interpolated.
^ This man speaks the truth.
I'd like to mention that more megapixels does not necessarly mean better quality photos. You still need a high quality lens to get good photos. One more thing is that some cameras use technology called 'Interpolation' (mostly in mobiles) some cameras use this to make pictures taken at a low resolution become higher. I used to have a Sony ericsson k700i which gave me pictures at 1280x1024 (which looked terrible) though they were actually taken at 1024x768 and just interpolated.
most lenses these days are pretty decent... except when it comes to manual zoom... and professional photography... (mobile phones are an exception, they are just plain crap)
but for point and shoot style photography (eg- on a family vacation/ friend roadtrip), thats when megapixels become important, because you dont have time to set up shots perfectly, you crop and zoom later on the computer, and pixelation is an issue on low megapixel cameras...
that said, I dont think we'll need to advance past a 40 megapixel camera...
Don't count your chickens yet Levi.... like many things (Ram, Hard-Drive and similar), we will keep going for more n more MPs.that said, I dont think we'll need to advance past a 40 megapixel camera...
as they say..... More the Merrier !! 
For Home photography I don't think anybody needs more than 5/6 megapixels, as to be fair most people are only gonna be viewing them at no higher than 1600*1200. Obviously if your a photography enthusiast you might want more.
Don't count your chickens yet Levi.... like many things (Ram, Hard-Drive and similar), we will keep going for more n more MPs.as they say..... More the Merrier !!
true I guess, I guess its not easy to estimate the future of computing.... but is it me or is the need for faster more updated computers/technology starting to slow?
eight years or so ago it was like you had to upgrade/get a new computer every year/2 years because there was a strong need...
nowadays though, I have my laptop and my 5 megapixel camera and I dont feel the need to upgrade, my computer/camera does everything I want it to.
It seems the only real push to update computers in my eye is for gaming, and simply ease of use for process heavy tasks...
SO the 'Want' for a faster computer is still there, but the 'Need' isnt... I guess soon we'll work out another use for computers and that absolute need will return...
PS- If you like CHICKENS follow this link; http://www.deviantart.com/view/36744047/
But I personally prefer Super Lemurs; http://www.deviantart.com/view/36873941/
(ok i'll stop advertising now)
Haha, i didn't think people needed photos the size of the side of a building. I was just curious i just want a camera that slim, preferrably a 6-7 MP Cybershot. Other than that, I'm happy with my polaroid camera
=j
LOL.... looking at that DA avataar, is that you?
** tsk tsk, Shame !! bad Levi !! Advertising in Forums **
Anyways, back to the Topic.... I'll somewhat agree with you about "Need" or "Want" for more updated, faster computers.
In my case, for almost last 3-4 years I'm upgrading my system almost every year. I have had P4 1.7Ghz, P4 2.4Ghz then P4 3.2Ghz and now Pentium D 3Ghz (which was a bad decision, I should have save money for another year and opt for Core 2 instead). Anyway, the point is... I'm graphic artist and with every new version of Graphic apps their need for resources increase.. so I have to keep looking out for better hardware to get work fast.
But, at the same time... for my Personal computing (day-2-day basis, home entertainment and stuff) as well as my Photography stuff... I'm very happily using iBook G4.
There is no dire "NEED" for me to upgrade my Desktop as well as My laptop right now, but the "WANT" of Core 2 and Macbook Pro and such tempting gadgets is lurking around...
Speaking of which, just couple of Months back I bought Nikon D70s...... and just today I saw pictures of D80 leaking on web. Damn... there is that "WANT" I see arising.
For Home photography I don't think anybody needs more than 5/6 megapixels, as to be fair most people are only gonna be viewing them at no higher than 1600*1200. Obviously if your a photography enthusiast you might want more.
Actually if you want like real photos on paper they usually suck if you have below 5 Megapixels - at least if you have a decent size photo.
Also if you crop a photo and would like the small cropped part as a big wallpaper for your room it won't look very good with a few megapixels.
This is because the high dot-per-inch density you need for a real photograph on REAL paper :-)
So yeah... I believe cheap cameras should hurry to advance to 6 Megapixels.