HappyMartin Posted July 29, 2013 Share I have a good mate who gets paid really top dollar for his work, he is constantly busy and very well know as a fashion photographer, he reckon those cameras are not really economically that viable, he rents them if need be. Quite right. You need to work them long and hard to make money back. I upgraded from a 33MP to the 80 a few years back. Never been asked more more pixels. 33MP was enough. Where you see it is big prints. I print up around 2 meters and at that size the cameras are special. Don't make money on prints I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost Posted July 29, 2013 Share Thats what I hear, but would still be nice to know Im wealthy enough to buy one; like a Santa Cruz MTB. Just dreams. And with Nikon making the D800 at 36MP that closed the gap a little bit too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Dale Posted July 29, 2013 Share Arm in a cast so not getting any riding done and not much photography. Got my wife to bring the beast into the studio on Sunday. Shot on a Leaf Aptus 12R. Excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big H* Posted July 30, 2013 Share How kewl is this....... http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-100d-rebel-sl1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wynandvdmerwe Posted July 30, 2013 Share TDF 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wynandvdmerwe Posted July 30, 2013 Share Froome's bike in Versailles before start of final stage Edited July 30, 2013 by wynandvdmerwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaBee Posted July 30, 2013 Share Thats what I hear, but would still be nice to know Im wealthy enough to buy one; like a Santa Cruz MTB. Just dreams. And with Nikon making the D800 at 36MP that closed the gap a little bit too. From what I've heard (and I'm not a Nikon guy) the 36MP is not in all instances - it goes into DX (crop sensor) mode at times. Obviously when you add a DX lens, but apparently you can manually force it there (esp if you're looking for speed). Then there are rumors of Canon working on a 75MP sensor... Ehhhrrr... are we getting faster disk hardware soon - will be interested to see what that one tries to push through in a burst! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wynandvdmerwe Posted July 30, 2013 Share Thomas Voeckler in background during a interview Edited July 30, 2013 by wynandvdmerwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted July 30, 2013 Share Don't get fooled by the MP wars. A lot more than big numbers involved. Like engines. My bakkie has a 4L motor. Quite a lot bigger than an F1. So it's not just about engine capacity. Same thing with MP. Often it's just an ego thing. Actually usually it is just an ego thing. Slowbee and The Ghost 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big H* Posted July 30, 2013 Share Are the MP war a lightning conductor to make one forget about the sensor size?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted July 30, 2013 Share Are the MP war a lightning conductor to make one forget about the sensor size?????? Not sure about the question or if its even serious but here is my answer anyway. All things being equal a bigger sensor will be better than a smaller one with the same pixel count. The moment pixel frequency goes above a certain point signal to noise ratio becomes poor. This is the problem at DSLR size sensors and why both Canon and Nikon flagship bodies hover around the 20MP level. In my opinion even an older generation 22MP sensor in. MFDB gives better results than a DSLR at the same pixel count. That assessment excludes low light ability of course. There are other issues involved such as lens quality but that exacerbates the problem rather than mitigating it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted July 30, 2013 Share Not sure about the question or if its even serious but here is my answer anyway. All things being equal a bigger sensor will be better than a smaller one with the same pixel count. The moment pixel frequency goes above a certain point signal to noise ratio becomes poor. This is the problem at DSLR size sensors and why both Canon and Nikon flagship bodies hover around the 20MP level. In my opinion even an older generation 22MP sensor in. MFDB gives better results than a DSLR at the same pixel count. That assessment excludes low light ability of course. There are other issues involved such as lens quality but that exacerbates the problem rather than mitigating it. I am pretty happy with my full frame sensor and 21 megapixels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geecee Posted July 30, 2013 Share just to lock onto the above discussion. I have a friend working at a pretty high end studio working for major design houses and large retails companies.they have full medium format setups. but 90% of the time they will use their 5D's over the medium format. For convenience sake and for the most part majority of people wont tell the difference between those shot on the MF or those on the 5D. clearly as a photographer you know the medium format is better, but one has to be realistic in what the world will actually appreciate. all comes down to ROI aswell. I dont think having a MF camera would necessarily get you more money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted July 30, 2013 Share I am pretty happy with my full frame sensor and 21 megapixels. It is definitely the sweet spot for DSLR cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted July 30, 2013 Share just to lock onto the above discussion. I have a friend working at a pretty high end studio working for major design houses and large retails companies.they have full medium format setups. but 90% of the time they will use their 5D's over the medium format. For convenience sake and for the most part majority of people wont tell the difference between those shot on the MF or those on the 5D. clearly as a photographer you know the medium format is better, but one has to be realistic in what the world will actually appreciate. all comes down to ROI aswell. I dont think having a MF camera would necessarily get you more money I agree, but then again I am only a 5D slut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted July 30, 2013 Share Agreed it is about ROI. Lots involved in this though. I like separating myself from my clients and my clients are frequently well heeled business people. They like that I have a bigger camera than they do. So it's not just about quality. It is also about perception. Personally for me it is about scale. Some images work well small, some large. Not that bigger is better. It is a matter of personal vision and understanding scale. My vision seems to tend to images that work well at large sizes. Wish it was not so but it is. I print on an Epson 11880. It is all costly but it is what floats my boat. I am always up for a chat with interested photographers so anyone who wants to pop in for a chat just PM me. My studio is in Joburg in Rosebank. Wyatt Earp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now