Tech Talk

The pointless megapixel war among digital camera manufacturers is over!

Yes, you know it’s over when last week, in an almost unprecedented move, Canon released its PowerShot G11 with a reduced megapixel count of 10 megapixels, compared to the 14.7 megapixels of its predecessor. The new image sensor of the G11 is supposed to be of higher sensitivity, improving noise performance by two stops over the G10.

Canon PowerShot G11

Canon is not alone in this paradigm shift. Several of its competitors are coming up with innovative features to entice smarter consumers, rather than using the age-old megapixel myth that’s not working anymore.

For example, Sony’s upcoming Cyber-shot TX1 and WX1 will use a new image CMOS 10.2-megapixel sensor, Exmor R, which is supposed to be twice as sensitive compared to conventional image sensors.

Sony Cyber-shot TX1

Fujifilm also surprised everyone when it announced the world’s first consumer 3D digital camera with its FinePix Real 3D W1, which utilises two lenses and two image sensors to give you 3D still and moving images.

Fujifilm Finepix Real 3D W1

Nikon kept the good news rolling with its S1000pj that comes with a built-in projector. So instead of everyone crowding behind a tiny LCD screen struggling to look at the pictures , everyone can now enjoy the images on any wall at any party!

Nikon Coolpix S1000pj

Samsung has also announced that it will soon release the 2View ST550 and ST500, both of which tout a front and rear LCD that allows you to shoot self-portraits with absolute ease.

Samsung 2View ST550

These are exciting times. I prefer a fight in features over a futile battle in megapixel count any day. The megapixel race has done nothing to improve the photography market other than taking up more hard disk space and making hard disk manufacturers happy.

With more innovative features being released into the market, camera makers have to keep up and come up with more creative traits of their own in order to compete. This can only be good for the consumers.

But now, consumers will have another battle on their hands trying to discern whether these latest features  - such as face, smile or scene recognition – are genuine enhancements or pure marketing gimmicks. Some of these features, like face detection, have even made it into the DSLR (digital single-reflex) camera realm. I definitely wouldn’t mind having “gimmicks” like 3D imaging or image projection in my DSLRs.

Marketing gimmicks or real features aside, the camera must ultimately be able to perform well in all aspects, like handling, hardiness, user interface and image quality. All the additional features will fall flat on their face if the camera is difficult to handle, if buttons are on the wrong place, or worse, if image quality is poor.

So, while I welcome the new age in innovation with new digital cameras, I sincerely hope it will not be a creative letdown.

Recently, a close friend of mine asked me to email her a list of “good and cheap” DSLR (digital single-reflex) cameras as she needed to draft quotations for a purchase order.

I sent her my recommendations but I couldn’t help asking her why her company, an SME (small-medium enterprise), needed to buy a DSLR.

“My boss thinks that if we have a good DSLR, we don’t have to hire a photographer,” she said.

“So, the camera has become the photographer, like the medium is the message (quoting Marshall McLuhan from Media Studies 101)?” I asked incredulously. She nodded and laughed.

But this is no laughing matter for people who earn a living from taking pictures.

The notion of “the bigger the camera, the better the pictures” has been around for the longest time. I always hear people around me lamenting that the “mickey mouse” camera (aka digital compact camera) they have means they cannot take good pictures.

On online forums, every time a nice photograph is posted, the first response typically is “Which camera did you use?”. I have also seen professional photographers telling prospective clients that they will get better pictures from them because of their “bigger cameras”. I’ve even heard of a guy who wouldn’t hire a wedding photographer who has a “lousier” DSLR than his own Canon 5D MKII.

Technology has been changing the landscape of photography since its humble beginning from Daguerreotype plates to 35mm film. Photographic equipment has become more compact and easier to handle through the years.

However, the digital image sensor is different. It has become very easy for anyone to take a photograph, as Alfred Chow succinctly expressed in response to my previous blog post that “technology is so good that the average Joe can take as good pictures as the professional”.

Even World Press Photo winner Julian Wainwright admitted that his award-winning pictures would not have been possible if not for technological advances.

These days, camera manufacturers include all sorts of fancy functions like face and smile detection in their cameras to entice consumers to part with their cash. This probably creates the perception that all everyone needs to do is press the shutter release and the camera will do the rest.

Yes, today’s digital camera is able to quickly and automatically lock on to a focus, accurately adjust the shutter speed and aperture, and give you spot-on auto white balance.

But what about intuition, situational awareness, picture composition, sense of where light is falling or fading, and the ability to add extra lights in different scenarios? These are the things that even the most advanced camera cannot comprehend, at least until camera cyborgs with human-like artificial intelligence becomes reality.

Give a high-end DSLR to a novice, and while he might give you a properly exposed picture (as long as he knows how to set the camera to auto), he would never be able to give you what a Magnum photographer (like Alex Majoli) can.

To me, it is better to have a good photographer with a lousy camera than a lousy photographer with a good camera.

Tags: DSLR, photography, technology