How Many Megapixels Are Enough?
I just got back from a terrific photo event, FotoFusion, at the Palm Beach Photographic Centre. This annual event brings together a large contingent of photographers doing all sorts of programs, everything from Photoshop and Lightroom tips to a panel on travel photography to ideas for marketing wedding photography and much more.
I did a few programs including printing and nature photography, but I also sat in on some others. I have known John Isaac for a while — he was a long-time photographer for the U.N. — so I knew his latest book on Kashmir would be great. He did a program about his photography there with a very personal travelogue through the area that was outstanding.
But what was interesting to me, and surprising to the packed crowd, was that the entire book was shot with the Olympus E-1 (done before the E-3 was out). This is not about Olympus, but about megapixels. This was a 5-megapixel camera — not 25, not even 15 megapixels, but a mere 5 megapixels. And the photos were terrific. I have seen the book, too, and no one would know that there were only 5 megapixels available.
This shows that a good sensor, attention to the craft of photography (exposure, camera steadiness, good lenses) and compelling photos are extremely important and can match a high megapixel camera any day. I am not suggesting that John or I would want to exchange our 10-megapixel E-3’s for the old E-1, but it does say that megapixels are not everything.
A good example of this include the Canon EOS 50D and 40D. I bought a 40D when it came out for my Canon system that I use for certain indoor work where I need a higher ISO (it does better than the E-3 in that situation). I used a 50D when I was working on a book about it (the 50D is basically a 40D with more megapixels and a much better LCD). The 40D is 10 megapixels, the 50D is 15, but I feel the 40D gives far superior results than the 50D. I think the sensor on the 50D simply is not as good as the one on the 40D. Once again, megapixels are not everything.
February 5th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Hi Rob!
Its funny but you’re the first professional I’ve seen post this candid (but completely correct) evaluation of the 50D’s versus 40D’s sensor. I’ve heard hundreds of amateurs complain about the 50D’s noise level but never a professional. I currently own both and use the 50D for wildlife and the 40D for landscape and low-light work. The 40D is a superb landscape 1.6x camera but I’ve found the AF accuracy and speed of the new 50D to be far superior than that of the 40D. For wildlife photography, the extra resolution of the 50D makes a big difference as well. I wonder if the next iteration of this product line will combine the best of each into a truly great prosumer camera.
Cheers,
Jeff Lynch
February 5th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Rob:
You remain one of the most grounded photo writers/teachers out there. Be careful about making sense, you may upset the applecart. Someone making great images with a camera like the E-1….that’s blasphemy to all those pixel peepers out there.
Keep up the great work, I always enjoy your insight and observations.