Reasons to choose 3043
Released in 2004, 3043 has about 31 mm² of sensor area, 3.1 MP effective resolution, and a 100 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.
Side-by-side comparison
Concord 3043
vs Concord 642
VS
Sensor area
31 mm²
304331 mm²
642- Area ratio
- 1:1
- Absolute difference
- 0 mm²
- Relative difference
- 0%
The 3043 and 642 have the same sensor area. Compare pixel density, sensor architecture, and release generation to understand likely image-quality differences.
Key specification differences
3043Metric642
3.1 MPEffective pixels0.3 MP
6.4 × 4.8Sensor6.4 × 4.8
3.15 µmPixel pitch10.12 µm
9.91 µm²Pixel area102.4 µm²
10.09 MP/cm²Pixel density0.98 MP/cm²
5.41Crop factor5.41
—Maximum video—
100 gWeight84 g
Secure DigitalStorage—
2x AAABattery2x AAA
Amber marks the value that is generally preferable in this comparison context. It is not an overall camera score.
How to choose between these cameras
The 3043 and 642 have the same sensor area. The 642 has the lighter body. The 3043 has the higher effective resolution. The 3043 and 642 were both released in 2004. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose 642
Released in 2004, 642 has about 31 mm² of sensor area, 0.3 MP effective resolution, and a 84 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.