Who Needs Megapixels?
Modern digital cameras have in recent years, created a false narrative regarding picture quality. The belief that the higher the megapixel count, the better the camera. The norm only 6 years ago would be 24mp for a professional or enthusiast model but now, that is considered low for professional use. Photographers convince you higher megapixels means better image quality and gives you the ability to crop more. I beg to differ. All the images in this post are taken with a professional DSLR that has 12.8mp. Ok, this is a blog that you’ll probably read on your phone or tablet but bear with me.
Megapixels are not the be all and end all of determining picture quality. High megapixels can bring problems as well as benefits. The sensor in a Sony A7RV is the same physical size as my Nikon D700. The Sony has 61mp and my Nikon has 12.8mp. This means that over four times the number of pixels are crammed into the same physical space as the Nikon. The amount of noise you encounter in low light is potentially higher in a high megapixel sensor because of the density of pixels. The more room you give to the pixels to read the composition, the better it can handle noise. Sony cameras have very sophisticated processors that compensate for that but that in itself creates issues with the eventual image.
The ability for a high megapixel camera to crop is undoubtedly an advantage. This however can lead to a certain laziness on behalf of the photographer. If you use only one lens and rely on the ability of your camera to crop heavily, you’re not necessarily thinking about the eventual image. A modern trend is to limit yourself to one fixed lens and work the scene better. It requires you to think about your composition more because your focal length is restricted. If you have a camera that can capture a larger scene that you only intend on using a fraction of, why not use your legs to get yourself in a better position to capture it in one? Some of these images are taken using the Nikon 24-120mm f4 lens so I am falling prey to to the easy route but the eventual composition is less crop-able because my cameras megapixel count is much lower. I also found that despite using a zoom with a broad range, I also used my feet to get the right shot.
My other two camera bodies (Nikon D750 & LUMIX S5II) are both 24.3 megapixels. They allow me a limited leeway in cropping for the finished image. They are both great cameras and I wouldn’t be without them but here’s the thing. The Nikon D700 is an awesome piece of equipment. The sensor in this camera was designed specifically for this model and the Nikon D3. Most digital camera sensors are made by Sony but the D700 and D3 are designed and manufactured by Matsushita, a subsidiary of Panasonic. They handle colour, depth and low light differently, in a way I have never come across before in my extensive personal history of camera ownership. The low light performance is stunning for a 16 year old camera. Some images can have an almost 3D effect. It is heavy, clunky and has only one CF card slot but the autofocus is quick and reliable and shutter sounds great. You feel like a professional using one which may sound a tad superficial but it does give you a sense of what you’re about when out taking photographs.
I really love my D700 and am using it professionally to produce good sized exhibition prints. I’m not saying ditch your 36/45/61 megapixel camera for a 12 because there’s so much more to using your camera than that. What I am saying is, don’t be wary of using older lower megapixel cameras if they suit your needs. I used 16mp Fujifilm cameras for several years and they produce beautiful professional results but now I’m a Nikon guy. The camera bodies are rugged, very nice to hold and backwards compatible to a legion of superb Nikon/Nikkor lenses. I would highly recommend you try a D700 as you will enjoy the experience of using it but most of all, be ever so slightly mind blown by the results it is capable of!
