10 meg vs 6 meg

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

The *ist DS image will be approximately 290 ppi output at that size  
where the Nikon D200 image will be around 370 ppi. Those densities  
are not going to show a lot of difference if any. I begin to see  
differences between 6 and 10 Mpixel much more clearly when the output  
ppi is getting down around 180 ppi, which is an image area around  
11x16 inches for 16 Mpixel. On a 13x19, the differences are becoming  
more obvious.

Since my usual print is in the A3 (11x17) range, the K10D's  
resolution is worth it to me: it gives more room for cropping and  
adjustment. Its other benefits and features would have to be more  
significant were I only printing to a 7x10.5 inch size on average.

Godfrey

On Oct 29, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Walter Hamler wrote:

> A friend just purchased a D200 so we did some comparo shots  
> yesterday. Same
> scene, fl, exposure, etc. His D200 and my istDL. He emailed me a  
> couple
> frames, 5.8 meg jpegs. I printed his and mine, 7 x 10.5 inches on  
> photo
> quality paper. He nor I can detect ANY difference in print quality. My
> printer only goes that size max, but I really wonder how much  
> difference
> there might be on a 13 x19 for instance.
> All this is in trying to determine if I really want a K10 or settle  
> for a
> K100 as a second body. I really want the image stabilization, and  
> like the
> benefit of having a second body that is identical to the DL in  
> operation. My
> thinking is that for the price of the K10 I can get a K100 body and  
> an Epson
> 1800 printer! (well, another 100.00 extra)
>
> Walt