I subscribe to a number of photographic information, review sites in an effort to keep up with some of the latest trends and advancements in cameras and equipment. These sites will often be the first to get hands on time with recently announced and released cameras and will publish reviews or sample photos.
I’ve looked at many of these sample photos from various cameras and I can’t remember the last time I saw one that I thought was truly “bad.” In most cases there’s only a small variance from good to excellent. The general quality of the digital camera has reached a point where even the worst is pretty good and the best are only a tiny margin apart.
Great picture quality which would satisfy 95%+ of photographers has become a given for any upper end camera. It’s only at the very limits you begin to notice slight differences and there are very few who can regularly push those limits.
Just an observation — not that any of this keeps us (me) from lusting after the latest and greatest new equipment. :-)
That’s a good point, Earl. The major differences that I see, if any, is in the distortion of a particular lens, not much difference in the way a particular sensor renders. And, of course, you are correct, that doesn’t stop the equipment lust! :)
It’s an interesting relationship between camera gear and photographer. Both need to be in sync but there is less variance these days in camera gear. Still it does play a role not only technically but in how the photographer relates and connects to his gear. I’ve had cameras which were technically vert good but I just didn’t fill connected with them and so I didn’t like shooting with them. I think “the lust” is partially in hopes of finding that perfect connection — where can hardly tell where the arm ends and the camera begins. ;-)
So true. Now it’s up to the photographer, to make images that really excel from the others. That is, if this is about images in the first place. I becomingly missed (or ignored) your point. ;-)
Ove, yes the person is alway he critical factor whether it be in photography or Formula One racing — still that person has to have competitive equipment they can feel comfortable with. As I commented to Paul above, it’s an interesting relationship between camera gear and photographer and while I’ve no doubt the “I” is the most important part of the equation the gear still plays a role…perhaps even beyond just picture quality. :-)
That is part of the reason I don’t think there will be a significant difference between the D800 and D800E. At least from the samples that Nikon has provided, the difference is very slight. Something that may or may not be corrected with capture sharpening. Maybe I will turn out to be wrong, but either way – cameras these days are pretty darn good.
Mark, I agree. The D800E is really an unknown factor at this point and practically may have more issues then benefits — still I think the difference in every day use will be so minor it won’t matter.
Good observation, Earl. I actually stopped following some of the websites because It’s getting to the point where the information is not as informative for me. Or maybe I’m just not interested in that anymore, happy with what I’ve got. And, as Ove, says, “its up to the photographer, to make images that really excel from the others.”
Monte, as i stated in comments above I totally agree the “I” is the most important factor. Still equipment in many ways plays a role…plus for us gear heads it’s fun and for me that’s part of photography as well. But those photo comparisons don’t prove anything much anymore in real world practice…they’re almost all very good. :-)
I go to some of these sites too, but I’m getting a lot of useful information since I’m shopping around for a new camera. What you don’t get is how the equipment feels and handles, especially if you are unfamiliar with the brand. Our local camera store doesn’t have all the latest models and will only order for you if you plan on buying. I find it difficult to determine if one camera is better than the next based on photo quality characteristics, as you say. But i don’t see how anyone can be dis-satisfied with the quality these days.
Ken, I absolutely agree and great point. How a camera feels in your hands and how logical the controls seem to the person using it are very important and can’t be covered in these reviews. If not familiar with a brand, perhaps first renting might be a good idea. Thanks!
I’ll echo what others have said — it’s the photographer, not the camera.
I don’t read the reviews because I have no intention of buying a new camera. I’m sure they’re all good. For my purposes the digital camera I have, and my two film cameras which are over 40 years old, still serve me well. I’ll probably never outgrow them.
pj, the only amendment I’d make to the saying “it’s the photographer, not the camera” is to say “It’s predominantly the photographer, not the camera.” The camera has a role as well…minor in most cases but more pivotal in certain extremes of photography. It’s like saying with race car drives it’s the driver not the car…true in many cases but I doubt any driver would want to drive a Fiat 500 in a Formula One race. ;-)
I recently read a review of the 5D Mark III that stated something to the effect that “no longer will we be able to blame our equipment for bad images.” And I don’t think it is just the newer cameras, although the technology is improving constantly. Most of our cameras are capable of far more than we are able to get out of them. It sure is nice to get something new though!
Tom, I think blaming the camera hasn’t been applicable for a number of years, at least with the better DSLR’s. It is certainly nice to have something new and there are always moments when those new capabilities will come to play.
What a fabulous image, Earl. I love your high contrast black and white treatment. And the gentle reflections of those soft cloud formations stand in wonderful contrast to the solid brick stones. Very impressive work!