Can you tell the difference?

Every year the camera manufacturers releasing new cameras. They claim that the new one will take better photos than the predecessor because of new sensors, better noise reduction and other nice scientific developments and discoveries. I think that it is great that digital photography gets better every day. Mankind always try to improve things. But from an artist and taoist perspective it is not that important for us. 

A photo remains a photo. And the changes are in technology are small and doesn't matter in real life. The only exception are special things that can only be archived with new technology (just thing of the possibilities of ultra high ISO etc.). But if you mostly shoot at normal conditions, like people did 30 years ago on film, you won´t see any real difference.

Lets have a looks at these two photos I took:


Both images were taken with the XF 27 at 2.8 (1/160 / ISO 1250) freehand. Can you tell me which one was made with the X-PRO1. I think this example will show us how small the visual difference are. You will find less noise by looking at the hundred percent "pixel peep" view of one of the two images. The colors also look slightly different (I used raw and applied the same provia-preset to both of them). 

Does it make a real difference? When you print them and hang them to a wall, will there be anyone who would say: "Hey! That photo is taken with an older camera without a 14 bit sensor? I can see that in  the shadow details!". I don´t think so.

X-PRO1 or X-T1?
If you feel sad because you own just an older camera like the X-PRO1 then look at this video:


Have you seen the video? What a fantastic camera, isn´t it? 

This is what Eric Kim always writes a lot of articles about. Don´t be a victim to G.A.S. and see your camera as a creative tool. If you think your camera is outdated than lock it away and try one or two weeks to live without it. Watch old reviews of your camera (Zack Arias does a great job on the X-PRO1) and then use the camera again and experience how great this "old" camera is.

I don´t want to stop from buying a new camera. If you have the money and want to buy this damn new thing...just do it! But you may also spend the money on a great vacation or other immaterial things. This article is meant to help you to think about photography and your role in this whole world of marketing. Sometimes you need a break and concentrate on what is real important thing:

taking the photos you love!

Cheers,

Nils

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why should you buy the new X-PRO2?

Image
I wrote some articles about the X-PRO1/2 in the past. I mentioned there that you don´t need to upgrade your camera if you're happy with it. Maybe you spend the money on travel, prints or some more lenses. If you are starting from the scratch or need a faster and better camera I will tell you why this camera is perfect for you: the rangefinder style - if you shooting street or reportage etc. it is great to use a camera that won't cover your whole face to maintain eye contact with your subject (this is not the case with the X-T1) faster auto focus even in near dark environments - I often missed a shot because of this with my X100s, X-PRO1 (but you can also use an X-T1) weather sealing - in conjunction with a water proof lens you can now do some shots without fearing a malfunction inside your precious camera more responsive - the faster cpu will make this camera more like an analog one where everything happens when you press a button without too many lagging ISO dial -...
More information »

Yesterday I sold my Ricoh GR III and traded it for a X100F

Image
Disclaimer: This is my personal opinion and the camera might work for you. This is not a Fuji is better than everything post :-) I've tried to love the Ricoh and have a little list with pros and cons: The good Size - If you need an APS-C sensor pocket camera, this is the one! The lens is superb and walks back into the body making it a super duper small camera! Image quality - the files have a great range and a neutral color reproduction. Nothing to complain. Craftmanship - the camera body is sturdy. Even the moving lens works flawless. The bad Menu - the menu system is not as easy as I know it from my Fuji gear. There are some nice ideas like the custom settings that can be tied to the mode-wheel, but overall I was not satisfied. Shutter button - a soft mess for me. It failed for me when it comes to a half press lock many times. It doesn't feel right for me. Display - in bright sunlight you are lost. I've also missed the possibility to review a photo through the EVF in brig...
More information »

The GF 100-200m - first impressions

Image
  I did it. After selling my whole Fuji rig last year in trade for a GFX50r combined with the 62mm 2.8 it was followed by the 50mm 3.5 and now the 100-200mm 5.6. Without a telephoto lens something is missing for me. Sometimes you need the compression and the depth of field provided by such a lens for portraits, architecture, landscapes and for things far away. In future I also want to buy the teleconverter to beef up the focal length a bit more. There are so many scenes that cry for a telephoto lens. Believe me! :-) My first impression was like expected for a Fuji lens in that price range, the resulting images are sharp with lots of detail without any compromise in color rendition. The bokeh is pleasing and the lens just does the job. There is no tube sticking out of the lens body wich makes the whole thing a bit heavy (but weather sealed) and bulky, but the quality of the results are worth the cramps and muscle pain. This is the hard work that photography was always about with hea...
More information »