I'd like to see the camera makers introduce a new metric called "pixel size" and start promoting that as hard as they do megapixels. That would help stop this suicidal war into more and crappier pixels on sensors. You can get an approximation of the pixel size by dividing the number of pixels into the size of the sensor. That doesn't take into account the gap between pixels (which differs on different sensors). Even if you do know the pixel size, that doesn't tell you much about the quality of the A/D converter, the eletrical noise levels inside the camera, the quality of the microlenses, or a number of relevant factors. Still, I think it's a better quick measurement of IQ than megapixels, especially for 6mp and above cameras. Here's how some of the current crop of cameras shape up using a thousands of pixels per sq mm measure. All other things being equal, a lower number should mean that each pixel produces a more accurate and lower noise reading. Things aren't always equal and pixel quality is only one of many factors in image quality. Still, by pushing pixel size as a metric, it would make manufacturers think twice about shoving 12 million pixels on a sensor the size of a pin head. It might also spark a move towards larger sensors in consumer cameras. 8 - Canon 1D (original 4mp version) 14 - Nikon D3 16 - Pentax K10D/K100D 24 - Canon 1DsM3 27 - Nikon D40x 31 - Canon D40/Rebel XTi 31 - Canon Rebel XTi 33 - Nikon D300 34 - Fuji S5 Pro 44 - Olympus E-410 56 - Fuji Finepix S6500fd 111 - Canon G9 241 - Canon S3 321 - Canon S5 325 - Sony DSC-H9 As you can tell by the inclusion of the almost antediluvian 4mp Canon 1D, comparisons of different models over time can be dicey. They've learned a lot about making better sensors since the olden days of digital cameras.