Reasons to choose DC 32
Released in 2003, DC 32 has about 21 mm² of sensor area, 3.1 MP effective resolution, and a 185 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.
Side-by-side comparison
Praktica DC 32
vs Praktica DCZ 3.0
VS
Sensor area
21 mm²
DC 3231 mm²
DCZ 3.0- Area ratio
- 1.44:1
- Absolute difference
- 9 mm²
- Relative difference
- 44.1%
The DCZ 3.0 has the larger sensor area. More area usually means greater light-gathering potential, though real image quality still depends on sensor architecture and generation.
These cameras were released 1 years apart. Consider sensor generation when comparing pixel metrics.
Key specification differences
DC 32MetricDCZ 3.0
3.1 MPEffective pixels3.14 MP
5.33 × 4Sensor6.4 × 4.8
2.62 µmPixel pitch3.13 µm
6.88 µm²Pixel area9.78 µm²
14.54 MP/cm²Pixel density10.22 MP/cm²
6.49Crop factor5.41
—Maximum video—
185 gWeight130 g
MultiMedia, Secure DigitalStorageSecure Digital
2x AABattery2x AA
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 DCZ 3.0 has the larger sensor area. The DCZ 3.0 has the lighter body. The DCZ 3.0 has the higher effective resolution. The DC 32 is the newer release. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose DCZ 3.0
Released in 2002, DCZ 3.0 has about 31 mm² of sensor area, 3.14 MP effective resolution, and a 130 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.