Do you think it's worth it to pay $100 more for the WPi over the WP? In that other post the difference is stated to be more megapixels and more screen resolution for the WPi.
Cannot comment upon that…but…love my WP…provided some GREAT shots in terms of clarity and color from a recent paddling jaunt in San Diego. In fact, I was surprised at how great the quality of the pics were.
Love my WP too, it’s a great camera. Guess it depends on what you are doing with the pictures. I hadn’t heard of WPi until you mentioned it and I looked it up. If the major difference it going from 5 to 6 megapixels, it’s all about what kind of prints you’re making. If you have a large format photo printer, or one is in your future, then the extra resolution can’t hurt. I don’t think you’ll be able to tell the difference in standard prints, and definitely no difference for web posting or emailing. If you want to make large prints, or use your photos for printing, the i might be worth it.
More megapixels means you can make larger prints. If your only intention is to post web photos or make wallet prints, you don’t need a lot of megapixels.
More megapixels gives you more photo-editing headroom also. Certain processes “throw away” data.
A resolution of 240 to 300 ppi is considered good for making photo prints. If you want 5" x 7" prints, that means a total of anywhere from 2,016,000 pixels (1,200 x 1,680) to 3,150,000 pixels (1,500 x 2,100). This equals 2.016 megapixels to 3.15 megapixels. You can do the math yourself to figure out how many megapixels would be required for larger prints.
The sales people will try to use lower resolution figures such as 200 ppi, because then they can say things like “This makes GREAT 8x10 enlargements!” (Ever wonder why 3.2 megapixels is a common number for camera specs? Depending on whose standard of print quality you use, the same camera could suffice for 8x10 prints or the much smaller 5x7 prints.) Do the math yourself so you don’t fall for their pitch.
The better screen resolution on the camera itself is the thing I really wonder about in whether it’s worth getting the WPi.
I don't think screen resolution would be worth the upgrade. It's still a small led screen, and especially if you're going to be using it outside, I doubt very much the difference would be noticeable. Mabe if you're going to be doing still lifes. If it focuses like the WP, you are probably never going to be manually focussing the thing. If you're not using the screen for focusing, you're pretty much just using to center you're image, and you don't need any more resolution to do that. (I've never had a problem with the WP's screen not being clear enough.)I really think the print resolution would be the big selling point, if that's what you're after.
And the difference is > $100 if you’re using e-bay for the WP.
BTW, I love my WP as well… use it under water often with the kids and in my PFD on the water… movies and stills are great fun when you’re not afraid of getting it wet.
I’ve only had my WP a month or so but I haven’t felt myself needing more screen resolution… it seems clear and detailed enough to me. Got a great deal on mine on an ebay auction, too. But be careful if you do that. Be sure you’re getting the manufacturer’s full USA warranty, if you care about warranties. Not all the auctions or even all the online stores are selling them with the USA warranty and not all of them make it easy to find that info. BTW, I love the camera.
re: screen resolution
I find the screen resolution to be more than adequate…no problema whatsoever…
WPi is supposed to start up MUCH faster!
Waking from off/sleep much more quickly is a major plus since All consumer cameras have the power-saving auto-off or sleep modes – the new WPi is “Ready to shoot just 0.6 seconds after the power is turned on” … older WP is about 3.5 seconds from off to ready! You could be missing a lot.
How long does it take from auto sleep … or does it just go off all the way?
YES, don’t miss capturing those moments!