Sweet, ain't it? I must have one!
All jokes aside, it's an awesome camera - truly. The fact that I think this camera is so awesome and the fact that I will likely never have one has had me thinking quite deeply lately. It has me thinking about our economy, mostly. And about how much money the various industries make us pay for, or to do the simplest things. If you wanted to drive down the street to the local Starbucks, to work, or to the grocery store, just jump into your 30 thousand dollar car after spending 50 to fill up the tank. Is it me, or are we just spending WAY more money than we've actually got? And you know what, that's what got us into this mess, isn't it? Things cost so much that people have to borrow at high interest just to buy most of them. Why the hell does a nice camera have to cost 3 grand (and that's by itself - NO LENS)? Sure, one can take a picture with virtually any camera, but c'mon. This IS a photography blog - and I AM a photographer.
The real tradgedy is that in two years (or less) that $3000 camera will be made virtually obsolete by its replacement, according to Moore's Law - Technology will advance itself exponentially, at a rate of double every 18-24 months. Gordon E. Moore, co-founder of Intel, made this observation in 1965, at the dawn of the integrated circuit. He was talking about transistors, specifically. But since he made his observation, it has literally applied to every aspect of digital technology since. And after about 1974, the term "Moore's Law" was coined, which is usually applied to anything that changes exponentially.
This has a very basic, if not general application to photography these days. Ever since the digital camera became cheap enough for nearly everyone to have the ability to own one, the technology involved has just skyrocketed, and continues to evolve at an exponential rate (there's that word again, you may end up seeing it here again a few more times), yet the price hasn't yet seemed to equalize as was the case with most other electronics technologies, like the VCR or the DVD player. Nope, digital camera technology seems to be getting MORE expensive as time goes by. This year, it has been all about the pixels. Every single camera manufacturer has sought to discover just how many pixels they can jam onto an image sensor. Next year, it may very well be what has been dubbed "black silicon", as is being developed by a Harvard University subsitiery, SIOnyx - which is basically sulfer dopped silicon that is literally black in color that is supposed to absorb more light - which means if a sensor can absorb more light, it can produce higher quality images with less noise. It's a tryly amazing breakthrough, if they can make it work. So far, the major drawback with modern digital cameras is signal to noise being proportionate to the physical size of each photosite, or pixel on an image sensor - this is sometimes known as "pixel pitch".
Compact digital cameras usually suck in anything but generous, bright sunlight because the sensors are literally 1-1/8 centimeter square in size, meaning the more pixels on a sensor of that size, the smaller each pixel is. The smaller the pixels, the less sensitive they are to light. So to compensate, the image processor drives up the signal gain, which increases the number of dead pixels, which increases noise - producing almost zero dynamic range with a very linear response to the light it captures. This is bad for the pictures you take, but good for the manufacturers who tricked all of you into thinking 14 mp on such a camera was the latest and greatest in digital camera technology. Sure the image is huge, but the problem is it'll likely look like crap if you find yourself in a place where there exists a contrast between shadows and highlights, or areas of light AND dark. This will drive the metering system of the camera NUTS. The result is not what you paid $300 for. For anyone reading this, the best compact cameras aren't even being made anymore because megapixels sell cameras, and not good technology. On a camera with a sensor that size, 5 mp is sufficient. I wish they would advance image processing and improve noise at high ISO using larger pixels - perhaps the cameras would produce better pictures. No average soccer mom prints 20x30". 5-6 mp is sufficient for a good 8x10" print. That SUPER for consumer level cameras.
But, it doesn't get much better for the more advanced crowd, such as myself. Really, the best way to make great digital images is with big FAT image sensors. So the step up from the 1-1/8 sensor is the APS-C, or DX sensor - which is roughly 17 x 24mm in size, or about twelve times the size of a compact camera's 1-1/8 sensor. Size it seems, really does matter. The camera I shoot with is the Nikon D80, a very capable camera. It produces a 10 mp image, which can produce a 20 x 30" print if I were so inclined to print that size, and I chose the right settings, used the right lens, and software. But, advances are being made, in the wrong direction. Still, pro-sumer and advanced amateur level cameras to even the pro cameras are still entrenched in the megapixel wars. The aforementioned Sony is no better. I mean honestly, what would I do with 24 mp? I remember when I couldn't even image 8 back in 1999. My wish for Sony, Nikon, Canon, and others is to please, PLEASE, for God sake make a camera that can make good images and not put is in dept for the next 16 years (the average time it takes to pay off a 16% interest bearing credit card charged to $1000, paying the minimum balance).
Let's face it, things cost so much money these days, and our paychecks aren't getting any bigger. I had to realize that it's not all about the camera after I had mulled through my thoughts the past couple of months. And I guess like most amateur photographers, this happens about twice a year or so, coinsiding with PMA in the spring, and Photokina in the fall. After drooling over the latest and greatest that I can't begin to afford, I realize that a new dishwasher is more important and that my nikon D80 has the ability to capture some amazing images, with of course my help. So unless someone miraculously donates a Sony a900 and lens to my future as a budding amateur photographer with dreams of going places, my D80 shall have to do. And it's doing just fine so far.
As for my future as a photographer. I am SO an amateur, with no delusions of grandeur. I have a nice camera, and I take nice pictures with it. As for style, I have none. Or so the makers of "What not to Wear" would say. But that's neither here nor there. My photographic style is as yet, undiscovered. If you look at the work I post in this blog, it is quite random. So my style is simply defined as whatever I see that I'd like to capture. My dream is to one day be able to quit my day job and travel the world, documenting everything I see that is beautiful with my camera. I'd also love to have my own studio one day. So, for now, my future is as an amateur. No shame in that. But I do dream.
More of my work to come......
Peace
No comments:
Post a Comment