Is the name of the game.
Sort of.
In cameras I mean.
My pixels are bigger than your pixels.
I got more of em!
So exactly how many pixels do you need?
I gotta say, this is kinda like bicycles, the upgrading part.
The eVil part.
My old camera was only like 8 mega pixels.
I liked it a lot.
Then I got a cheapo P&S which was like 10 mega pixels and I felt kinda funny that my cheapo camera had more pixels than my "real" camera.
So then my old camera died, so I was looking at a new camera and my cheapo camera died too so I got me a new cheapo with 12 mega pixels and a new to me "real" camera with 10 mega pixels.
Which sort of put me back in the same situation.
Following along so far?
Cheapo camera = more pixels than good camera.
Good camera meaning the big camera.
So now I'm looking for a new big camera, cause you know, I just can't have the cheap camera being better than the big camera, but it's sort of like upgrading to a carbon frame.
Just how much better can it be?
If you know what I mean.
It seems the camera companies are in like a mega pixel war, more is better, and I'm drinking the Kewlaide.
I want me more mega pixels!
Like I want a camera with like a couple GAGILLION mega pixels, so my picture files will be in the gigabytes, and I can crop them down like 2000%.
If I had a camera with say, 24 GAGILLION mega pixels, I wouldn't need to upgrade for oh, say a year or two.
At least until the 45 GAGILLION mega pixel camera came out.
The resolution in my pictures would be so good you could see atoms!
Subatomic particles even!
Hell if my camera had 24 GAGILLION mega pixels I could possibly solve the Grand Unified Theory in physics!
I'd have photographic evidence don't you know.
Whew!
Got myself all worked up!
So anyways, I've been thinking about all this camera stuff and lemme tell you, it's been keeping me up at night, and I've come to some conclusions.
First of all, a 24 GAGILLION mega pixel camera might not be a good idea.
I mean after five pictures, your hard drive would be full.
Then again, I could always get one of them external thingys.
Okay, don't let me go there.
Second, I don't make a living off my camera and spending some serious coin on one is not a good idea.
Well, seeing as how I sort of teach photography, I sort of do make a living with it.
A camera I mean.
Well, that sort of puts me in a spot!
Maybe I should sell all my bicycles and get me a Hasselbloom or Leeka.
Or something.
Stay tuned.
Oh and I finally got around to putting up some student work on the webs, you can see their pictures here.
I'll put a link up on the side bar later.
6 comments:
I think that the pixel battle is now over....The emphasis now seems to be all about Sensor size.
Most point and shoot cheapo cameras have very small sensors and mixed with the high number of pixels the manufacturers give them just means more noise....
I would say about 12 megapixels with a good size sensor is enough for what most amateur photographers would ever need....
Mind you it's good to hear that you have something else that you can spend your money on and continuously upgrade...Ha Ha...
-Trevor
Seriously, nowadays you need a camera in Celeste...
Trevor, I'm thinking of going full frame but it's a bit outta my reach and it's not like you guys are going to notice anyways,
Steve A, it's not for a lack of trying.
The pixel war goes on, at least for consumer cameras and cellphone cams. Not that the pros are adverse to more pixels, but most understand that having more/smaller pixels creates a tradeoff in image quality. A good body and sensor are nice, it is often the lens that is the limiting factor.
But who am I to talk! I am impatiently checking the tracking number for my new eVil Canon EOS-M. It seems to be stuck in some NY sorting facility!
Go full frame. Nikon d600 is what I am coveting. That is one of the least expensive full frames out there. You have to have full frame lens also though.
Andrew, full review requested.
Maybe I'll go mirrorless for a back up.
Mark, I've been eyeballing that puppy for a while.
Post a Comment