Interesting read if considering an upgrade

[smoke665]

Found this pretty much on point common sense The Three Camera Specs You Should Stop Obsessing Over in 2025

 

[KJ_North]

Interesting but I disagree with 2 out of the 3 points. Again its all subjective and it depends fully on what you are shooting.

IMO Megapixels due matter if you are cropping significantly especially on smaller things like birds. I don't care how much zoom you have in most cases you still require significant cropping. I will take my 45 MP over 24 MP all day long.

Burst Rate - To say that 3-5 frames is enough and shooting at 30 FPS is a waste then obviously he has never tried shooting a bird in flight. I had the EOS R it had a MAX of 3-5 FPS. Trying to get the perfect wing position etc with that camera was absolutely sheer luck. Now I shoot at 30 FPS and sure tons of duplicates BUT also that absolutely perfect wing spot is mixed in there as well. Not to mention his statement on filling up the buffer is also a moot point as unless you trying to shoot more that 4-5 seconds continuously you wont hit the buffer limit. I haven't hit it yet.

I hear what he is saying BUT there are reasons why these higher specs exist and places where they are very useful.

 

[DanOstergren]

Regarding megapixels and how many are actually needed, I have yet to discover a need for more than the 21 that my camera offers but that's just me. I'll be honest though, I miss the 12 megapixel files of my original Canon 5D. It took ages to fill up a hard drive with those.

Regarding owning a camera with 40+ megapixels, I think I would rather rent one than buy one if I book a gig that requires those numbers.

 

[greybeard]

I totally agree with this portion of the read:
"While everyone obsesses over these meaningless numbers, the specs that actually impact your photography get ignored. Battery life determines whether you can finish a shoot. Low-light performance decides if you can capture the moment or just noise. Build quality affects whether your camera survives a real professional workload. Ergonomics determine if you enjoy the shooting experience or fight the camera the whole way. Color science makes your images look natural or artificial, but you won't find it on a spec sheet. Weather-sealing keeps you shooting when others pack up, but it doesn't make headlines".

Especially Build Quality, Low-Light performance, Ergonomics, and Color Science are most important to me. 24mp is more than I need but nice to have. I always carry an extra battery when I think I'll need it. I do have a high rez D850 and it is a fantastic camera but, if it were only 24mp I would probably like it just as much. These are just MY NEEDS and my opinions.

 

[smoke665]

IMO Megapixels due matter if you are cropping significantly especially on smaller things like birds. I don't care how much zoom you have in most cases you still require significant cropping. I will take my 45 MP over 24 MP all day long.

I guess there are exceptions in every case, but in your particular case...why do you feel the need? What is the final use of your crop? Are you printing big wall size images??? With prints it's about DPI, and it doesn't take as much as you think. For example the 24mp you mentioned produces an image with a resolution of 6000x4000 pixels, with a 150 dpi that will give you a 40x26.6 print with no quality print. Crop your image 50% to say 3000x2000 you're still 20x13 without a significant degradation on quality in the print.

Then there's the issue with sharpness in extreme crops, what looks good at first isn't always sharp when you blow it up, and if you're that far away from the subject it's going to me difficult to focus anyhow, especially if you're shooting though stuff.

Now I shoot at 30 FPS

Again to each their own, and I don't shoot birds....not with a camera anyhow, but this seems like taking a .22 full automatic bird hunting instead of my trusty 20ga pump, just point and spray, hoping you might get lucky. Again I don't shoot this genre, but if I did my first piece of equipment would be the addition of a long lens capable of bringing me in closer to the target, where I could concentrate on capturing the shot, with bracketing.

 

[cgw]

I say, "Amen, brother!" Have too many friends and associates who fear dying in their sleep not having bleeding edge photo or audio gear.

 

[KJ_North]

but if I did my first piece of equipment would be the addition of a long lens capable of bringing me in closer to the target, where I could concentrate on capturing the shot, with bracketing.

I use a 200-800 zoom lens so I have the reach covered. The reason for so many FPS is to hopefully catch the wings etc in the best possible position. With the EOS R and a 3-5 FPS max often the shot was simply not there. Once you look at the photos of a bird in full flight you realize virtually every single shot has the wings, head, body etc in a totally different position. It gives you amazing flexibility to pick the shot that best captured the moment you were looking for.

Case in point I shot these with the EOS R - There were very few frames in between these. My friend was there with his R7 shooting at 30 FPS. He captured the color of the wings etc as he 10 times the amount of frames to choose from. Again each to their own but for me when I saw what he had captured standing right beside me at the exact same time it was eye opening. It truly showed the difference between the two cameras and the limitations of the EOS R at the same conditions. We both has the exact same lens the RF200-800 he was zoomed out a bit more as he has a crop body.

 

[cgw]

Horses for courses, as always. Intrigued by the near-cult following for Fujifilm's nearly decade old X-Trans II sensor+processor. Have 3 of their cameras of that vintage. Will shoot 'em till they break.

 

[21limited]

The whole thing is amateurish drivel.
There really reasons for high resolution, like , you print really big. In one of my medical appointments there was a huge, wall sized image take with a 12 MP camera. It looked great from outside the room, but sitting 6 feet away it was dismal.

People who shoot birds need faster FPS. MY guess is up to about 12 fps. After that you get too much duplicationn. I get along with 8 fps, and that works for me. An image every .125 second.

I won’t critique the whole article, but how about one pargarph, you can imagine how long my response would be if I analyzed the whole thing.

"The psychological impact of burst mode is equally damaging. When you know you can fire off 30 frames per second, you stop anticipating moments and start reacting to them. Instead of watching for the peak action, you just hold down the shutter and hope something good happens. It's like trying to become a better basketball player by closing your eyes and throwing the ball up in the air."

What a joke, he thinks burst mode means you stop analyzing the moment. While it’s probably true for him, some of us analyze the moment waiting for the right pose, then shoot a short burst. But no one knows what happens after that first image if they shoot single frames. They may intheir conciet think they have the best pose, but without burst, they don’t actually know.. Claiming you can evaluate when the image should be taken is pure ego. But you won’t know that if you single shoot. Again he claims burst shooters just hold down the button and hope. Persoanlly with smal critters, I wait for angle to the camera, the light, and pose all to be good, then shoot off a burst, which I maintain unitl the cirtter ahs moved out of the optimum conditions. I simply make better use of available conditions by shooting burst, with the realization that movement after I press the shutter release has the same conditions and may lead to a better pose. I’m not willing to assume, I can nail the exact moment when everything will be optimal, that would be conceited.

He claims people “just hold down the shutter and hope something happens.” When ever you see people trying to build themsleves up by putting down others, you know you have buffoon. I know of no one that does that.

What really happens,
2018-01-29-park-Photgrphers- by Norm Head, on Flickr

Here we all are, waiting for specific bird to give us a pose. We get a good pose with optimal lighting conditions etc. and all the sudden all the shutters are going off like machine guns. As soon as something changes everyone takes thier finger off the shutter release. No one is just holding the shuter release down. He makes up stuff, then says it’s wrong to do it. He’s never been where I shoot.

As for the waiting for the perfect moment for the perfect moment, this image woul be my example of why that’s dead wrong.
NF-birds-2 by Norm Head, on Flickr

This being from the middle of 6 shot burst. WIth the burst rate being .125 seconds, and the reflexes of human being on average being over .2 seconds, there is no way your reflexes get you this shot. Even with anticipation I selected on wing position and having both birds in the frame and in focus. This was by far the best shot of the sequence.
Based on single shot shooting, my chance of getting this image would be minimal. It took lot of skill to get this shot. Undertandig the flight path of the birds, checking sun position for the best angle for lighting. I set up just off a sidewalk but angle my camera so as not to include the people walking behind the puddle. The idea that I just shot a burst hoping for the best image is a ludicrous misrepresenttion of what I and most wild life photgrapehers do.

I could go through the article with this kind of analyisis, but you get the point. No one should start telling others what is relevant an what isn’t based on their own shooting style and expereince. The end result of doing that, is like this article. People who know how to shoot will think you are a dufus. Quoting the practices of people who don’t know what they are doing as grounds for dismissing photographic capabilities in cameras is pointless and ignorant. IN this case, claming people who shoot in burst prepare less, and pay less attention than people who don’t is absolute nonsense. IMHO people who don’t use the full capability of the camera to get the shot they want when appropriate, are just people who don’t understand their own camera, forget about having any knowledge to pass on to other shooters.
My take is, those who would miss the opportunity to get the birds above based on a belief that burst mode is taking random images is too indoctrinated to give anyone advice on photography. Yet, on the interent, they do, all the time.

If you want to know what you need to take an image, learn from people who take the kinds of images you want to capture. Not some Internet dude who thinks he knows everything about everything. Want to do good portraits like some you’ve seen on the internet. Find out what the guy uses and how he does it. What you need for a 40x60 portrait will be different from what you need for a 12 MP bird image.

You have to learn good technique whether you shoot burst or single shot. You have to have appropriate equipment no matter what you shoot. Don’t let some lazy generalist on his throne dictate waht you might need to accomplish what you do. Learn from the people who actually do what you want to do. They will have the experience to select appropriate gear, shooting styles etc.

End of this Sunday morning sermon.

 

[smoke665]

Case in point I shot these with the EOS R

Question? It might be the compression/resolution but there is a noticeable softness and significant artifacts around the ducks as in the first one here. Any insight as to why? At 1/2500 shutter I wouldn't think there would be motion blur even with the 200mm focal length indicated, or was this an extreme crop?

 

[greybeard]

This read has convinced me that I have more cameras than I will ever really need.
Nikon D850, Nikon Z50, Nikon Z5 and a bunch of lenses.

 

[21limited]

Just the 850 is probably overkill. That’s a fantastic camera, IMHO probably the best all-purpose camera of all time, although I don’t know anyting about mirrorless. For years it was the top of my “If you’re only going to buy one camera, and can afford the lenses you need” list.

 

[21limited]

Question? It might be the compression/resolution but there is a noticeable softness and significant artifacts around the ducks as in the first one here. Any insight as to why? At 1/2500 shutter I wouldn't think there would be motion blur even with the 200mm focal length indicated, or was this an extreme crop?
View attachment 287397

Your software sucks. I got a much better rendition, using software designed specifically for enlargemnt. Good enlargiing software, doesn’t leave pixelated images, it smooths them out. I ran it, looked at my the xample and got a good looing image. The poster in this case requested no editing of his work so, I’m not going to post. You’ll have to take may word for it.

Enlarging without working from the original file is rarely going to produce the best results.

 

[cgw]

Wow, some trollish, wildly-OT ranting here! Some need to keep their sticks on the ice.

 

[21limited]

Did you actually read the article? I’m wondering what you consider to be off topic? I would assume anything brought up in the article would be considered on topic and open for discussion. Am I wrong?