Tech Talk

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

After weeks of rumours and leaked specifications circulating around the Internet, the Canon EOS 500D is finally unveiled to the world.

This consumer-targeted digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera has a whopping 15.0-megapixel CMOS sensor utilising Canon’s latest DIGIC 4 image processor, allowing you to record full high-definition (HD) video and delivering improved Live View capability via a big three-inch display.

I was among the few lucky local journalists to have an early hands-on with the only available EOS 500D in Singapore. However, I left the launch hoping that this latest DSLR will not trigger another megapixel race.

Despite many articles explaining that a higher megapixel count doesn’t necessarily translate to better image quality, the megapixel myth persists.

I had a conversation with a colleague recently and he was talking about this camera having 10 megapixels and that, to him, means the camera is definitely good. So, I told him about the megapixel myth. His reply: “More megapixels doesn’t mean better quality? Then, what’s the point? I thought it should be like a car – the higher engine capacity, the more power the car?”

It was then I realised that for the lay person, the megapixel factor has become the first point of reference. For example, every time I went on an assignment with my company-issued Canon 1D MK II, I was asked how many megapixels my “big camera” has. When I said eight megapixels, a few unimpressed quipped: “Even my small digital camera has 10 megapixels!”

I think the megapixel myth has to do with advertising and marketing. However, you can’t blame the marketers. They can’t really tout noiseless images as a factor, can they? Half the people out there don’t even understand ISO settings, let alone noise in digital images.

Megapixel is a number and it is thus easily understood and remembered. It’s a dream word and number for marketers seeking to differentiate their products in the current flood of digital cameras. However, when engineers have to squeeze in more megapixels just to please the marketing department, it can result in cameras that produce horrid images with awful noise.

It is the onus of consumers to educate themselves more about photography and focus less on a camera’s specifications. Once you understand the inner workings of photography, all the camera’s specifications will make sense to you.

And when you go to the camera shop next time, see the sales person’s face crumble as you ask about features such as startup/shutdown time, accurate colour reproduction, noiseless images, fast auto-focusing, intuitive controls and weather-proof capabilities.

Let’s work together to debunk the megapixel myth!

Tags: DSLR