about megapixels in cameras

Do megapixels matter? How many do you need?

In short, it depends on you and is entirely subjective. There is no ruleThe more megapixels the better". Although this is something that manufacturers of digital cameras and cameras in phones are constantly trying to impose.

Experienced photographers have long known that megapixels really don't make much of a difference. But people who buy smartphones often take a more sophisticated model, where they drew more megapixels in the camera parameters.

I will express my opinion. I now have a conditional sufficient limit of 24-26 megapixels. I think this is normal resolution. Below I will give arguments FOR and AGAINST a large number of megapixels.

Why don't you need a lot of megapixels in your camera?

  • The vast majority of images are now viewed from the small screens of smartphones, where megapixels do not play a significant role.
  • Even if the photos and print, few people do this in the format of 1 meter by 1 meter or more. And with print formats up to A2, any digital camera can easily handle it.
  • The number of megapixels does not determine the quality of the photo, although some people equate these concepts. Quality comes first lighting.
  • Small matrices, such as in smartphones or wretched micro 4/3, are not capable of producing high resolutions. The numbers that are inflated in the specifications - interpolation and have no real basis. Photos with 64 megapixels on a smartphone are in fact no better than photos at 12 megapixels from the same smartphone.
  • You can achieve a higher resolution by merging panoramas on any camera (relevant for landscape photography).
  • Files with fewer megapixels take up less space and process faster on older computers.

What gives more megapixels in a camera?

Everything depends on the viewer. For people who consume content from smartphones, high-resolution photos really do not make sense. But for owners of normal monitors, there is a difference.

If you have a large enough monitor with good resolution, you will be able to clearly see the difference between 20 megapixels on one camera and 30 or 45 megapixels on the other. And if you open a photo at 12-16MP on the same monitor, then there will be literally nothing to consider there. The difference in detail will be huge.

For people who are serious about photography, I highly recommend have a 27-32 inch monitor with 4K resolution. You will see photos in a completely different way than on devices with a smaller diagonal and FullHD resolution.

I won't go into detail about printing photos. Of course, higher resolution allows for larger prints. But we do not often print canvases on the entire wall. And small and medium-sized photos can be printed from anything.

Higher resolution will allow you to use a full-frame digital camera even in crop mode. This is a relatively new feature. Mirrorless added this functionality.

Also, a higher resolution gives more opportunities for cropping / reframing photos when processing in Lightroom.

But the most important thing is what you are used to and what is the norm for you. I have been shooting for a long time full frame camera with 20 MP and that was enough for me. To this day, there are plenty of professional photographers who have enough of this permission. Then I had Canon r with 30MP and I felt the difference. After R, I no longer wanted to use a 20 megapixel camera. Now I have Canon R5, where even more detail can be seen when approaching. It's great because you like it and that's it.

The practical use of extra megapixels is not as significant as your emotions from looking at a photo.

On medium format cameras like Fujifilm GFX100S more permissions. 100 megapixels cause a WOW effect even after 45 megapixels. The detail is phenomenal.

Total

The question is, where should you stay? Or do you not need to stop and play megapixels indefinitely? It's subjective. As you wish, so be it. But the pictures are prettier or better from bóThere will definitely not be more megapixels.

Related articles: How many megapixels do you need to print photos?

how to choose a camera

Is it worth it to change the old camera to a new one?

Before you another article on the topic how to choose a camera.

So, let's open the question from the title. As a rule, a camera upgrade means replacing:

What depresses me in this matter is the lack of any clarifications. If the question sounds exactly like this, without additions, “Should I change my old camera for a new one?”, then in general it doesn’t matter at all.

You can change, you can not change - it will not change anything. The problem is that people blame failures on their technique, not their skills.

What do newer models of cameras give?

  • In terms of photography, new cameras will not make pictures fundamentally more beautiful / better.
  • In terms of video, they will give more resolution, autofocus and better dynamic range. It will be eye-catching.

In terms of just pressing a button and expecting results, the new cameras will produce better quality video, but almost exactly the same photos as old camera models.
If you aim for a quality result, then you need to upgrade your shooting skills first of all.

Buy and not think - the motto of our time

People often don't understand how a camera works, when to use light, when to use high-aperture optics. Instead of sorting out the issue, it is much easier for them to spend money on a new camera and expect a fundamentally different result. But he won't.

Can you shoot with the old one?

I am not saying that it is necessary to shoot for junk, tk. technique is not important. Not at all. If you are into photography/videography, using the new technique is much more enjoyable than the old one. Just don't confuse results with ease of use.

The essence of the upgrade is to make it easier and more convenient to shoot and that's it. Although this does not apply new cameras from Sony. The difference in technical parameters does not have such a critical result as many people think.

Regarding the quality of shooting, when I draw parallels between new and old cameras, I mentally compare cameras of the same price segment and with the same sensor size. It would be foolish to say that the camera on micre 4/3 shoots just like full frame.

Another thing is, some people believe in progress so strongly that they think that the new crop can be better or at least the same as the old full frame. It is nonsense. Full-frame cameras give a different color reproduction and display volume in a different way. The new mirrorless crop will have better autofocus, maybe even less noise at high ISOs, but it won't be a full frame. Even if you attach stupid speedbooster.

At the same time, and full frame not required to buy. Especially in the hope that the pictures will get better. It's not the salt.

Total

The article turned out to be quite skeptical and nihilistic. What is the truth? The truth is that it is necessary to set specific tasks, for which the technique will be used. The tasks “I want to shoot children, nature, landscapes, the sea, portraits” can be performed by any camera ... and any phone already. The task of “I want to shoot” a video is performed by any modern camera. “I want to take beautiful pictures” - absolutely any camera will do.

For a competent choice of a particular model, you also need to correctly raise the question and accurately understand your goals. If the question is not accurate, then you can take anything. It won't affect anything.

Also I can order a consultation on the choice of technology.

choosing a camera for weddings

Budget camera for shooting weddings in 2022

Asking a question what camera to buy for weddings, people assume that the camera is where all the image quality is. Just choose a camera and it will do everything for you. It is enough to buy a camera and the newlyweds are ready to pay for the shooting. These are very naive notions. Any modern cameras give ample image quality both in the photo and in the video. If you pick up ANY camera from 2018 or newer, you can be sure that it already knows enough. Another thing is that today just having any cool camera is no longer enough to get you paid for filming. But in this article we will talk about the camera.

For wedding photography, any camera with interchangeable lenses will do (oh horror, even released before 2018 - in general, any). The difference between newer models is greater shooting comfort. They have a more convenient focusing system, a lighter body, better control.

Newer cameras are bought not for a fundamentally better picture, but for ergonomics and ease of use. Therefore, I highly do not recommend any models of Sony cameras. More specifically, for wedding photography from budget models, I would recommend Canon RP. But this is not important, you can Nikon, you can Fujifilm, you can full frame, you can crop.

In more detail, I want to talk about filming. Wedding video shooting is more capricious in terms of technology requirements.

What do you need in a wedding video camera?

  • good autofocus
  • convenient control
  • preferably high working ISO
  • long battery life
  • good skintone and accurate white balance
  • high quality Full HD

Based on the combination of characteristics among budget models, I will recommend Canon m50.

canon m50 front

Best autofocus on video now with mirrorless cameras Canon, Sony, Nikon. I Canon m50 autofocus is fine.

About management. The camera must have a screen that you can see well under any conditions - not only indoors, but also in bright sunlight. This is one of the reasons why I strongly do not recommend Sony cameras. In sunlight, the vast majority Sony models you won't see anything on the screen. For weddings, this is a disaster. There is no normal visibility of the screen - there is no control over the shooting. It is also important that you can quickly switch key functions and have them at your fingertips. At a wedding, you need to quickly respond to what is happening, this is reportage shooting. There's no time to dig through endless menus and look for the right option. Comfortable control is critical, otherwise you may miss a lot of important points.

ISO. Shooting weddings takes place under any lighting conditions - both in the bright sun during a walk, and in the twilight of entrances, registry offices and banquet halls. Of course, it is desirable that the camera has high working ISO. In this regard, the Canon m50 is a relatively weak camera. But we must understand that not everything rests on the ISO. It is enough to put a pancake on the m50 Canon EF-M 22mm f2 or inexpensive aperture Viltrox 23mm f1.4 and you will shoot with this camera without noise under any conditions - the rite of the hearth, contests in the semi-darkness, and so on.

canon efm 22mm f2

What you won't be able to do on the m50 is stand at one point in the banquet hall and shoot from there with a dark zoom like Canon EF-S 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 STM. Ideal for such tasks Canon C100. But now the trend is more towards shooting with camera movement on steadicame, so the m50 with a compact fix will be much more convenient than a heavy camcorder.

Battery life Canon m50 is very good in its class. The camera can withstand about one and a half hours of FullHD video recording.

Good color rendering. All Canon cameras are famous for their good skin tone and nice color reproduction. What is important is that such cameras do this automatically without complicated settings. When you are shooting a story in dynamic conditions, it is important that the camera is able to adjust itself to the shooting conditions. For example, cameras Fujifilm and Sony there are problems with this. You can squeeze good color out of them, but it works well in controlled conditions and if you know how to set them up correctly.

Quality Full HD. Canon m50 provides acceptable quality in FullHD format. The video is already sharp, not at all as soapy as it was on earlier Canon cameras (800D and earlier). By the way, Sony crops have the lowest quality FullHD. Sony's six thousandth series writes well in 4K, but it gives out simply disgusting FullHD. There are people who suffer from the fact that they write weddings in 4K, and then reduce to FullHD to give to clients. Better not to suffer. For your own comfort, it is better to immediately write in normal FullHD, which still remains the standard format for such shooting.

I also recommend an article on choosing lenses for Canon m50. Although with a lens Canon EF-M 22mm f2.0 You can remove everything and not worry at all.

What if a new camera comes out and the Canon M is discontinued?

One of the common fears about the Canon EF-M system, which is quite sluggishly updated last years. Look, it's important to decide on the approach. Even if this happens, it will not be critical for you at all.

If you choose a tool for work, and not a toy, you should not worry about what will / will not work next. Canon m50 is inexpensive and does its job. You buy a camera with 1-2 lenses and a steadicam and that's it. This set should pay off quickly and just make money. A new camera, whatever it is, will cost significantly more and will not affect your commercial result in any way. Get rid of the stupidity that people pay more for a more expensive camera in the hands of a cameraman.

Another continuation - what if the purchased optics on the EF-M depreciate? Understand, you do not buy a suitcase of expensive lenses for a bunch of thousands of dollars. Sum investment - a few hundred dollars. Yes, do not care about the release of new models and the reduction in the cost of this optics. You are already taking the cheapest that is available. And this purchase should quickly pay off for you. Any other system would be pointlessly more expensive.

By the way Canon perhaps plans to release new Canon M camera. The answer is, you don't have to wait. If you want to conquer the wedding market, you have to take what you have and bomb and bomb until you lose your pulse and consciousness.

Related Videos

Interview with a person shooting weddings with a Canon m50

Lenses for Canon m50

What is the difference between the Canon M50 mark II and the first Canon M50

Article - Canon crop benefits

I can also order a consultation on the choice of technology