The myth of maximum megapixels

November 17, 2006 (Computerworld) -- Camera vendors and consumer electronics retailers sell digital cameras as if the pixel count -- the number of pixels a camera's electronics can capture -- is the most important measure of quality.

Ten years ago, consumer-level digital cameras weren't capable of taking good pictures. The optics were lousy, the electronics were unsophisticated, and the settings were relatively limited. Buying a better camera back then meant spending big bucks for a 2-megapixel model rather than, say, a 1.3-megapixel one.

In an effort to convince you that your camera is obsolete and you need to buy a new one, camera vendors keep harping on the more-megapixels-are-better myth.

Megapixels are expensive. Assuming you have a set budget for buying a new camera, the quality of pictures generally will be better if you spend less ...

Megapixels are slow. Higher pixel counts means more data flying around in your camera's electronics. It takes longer to move more data than it does to move less....

Megapixels are big. Higher pixel counts can generate JPEG images that are several megabytes in size. In addition to slowing things down, these larger files will eat up on-camera storage space quickly. The larger files can also eat up hard disk space on your PC over time... >> More