How much does your sensor matter?
Digital cameras are pretty rad. They allow us workflow opportunities and efficiencies that were previously not possible, and the quality and feel that is able to be captured on those sensors has come a long way since they were first taken seriously by serious photographers. These days, however, the options are as endless as the number of pixels that the sensors contain. There’s still some CCDs floating around, then there’s the CMOS. There’s APS-C, Full Frame, schmedium format, and full-size medium format. There are sensors that can capture the IR spectrum and those that can be modified to see that IR. There’s megapixel counts from 12-16 up to 150 or so. If you are just getting into photography, knowing where to start could be incredibly overwhelming, though you will likely hit some limits based on the size of your wallet. If you’ve been shooting a while and have been through a few different cameras and sensors, you may have some ideas or preferences, but if you aren’t one of those photographers who upgrades at every new cycle of technology (like me), then by the time you are looking for a new camera body the entire landscape may have changed. That size-of-the-wallet issue will probably remain though, so don’t get too excited unless you won the lottery recently. Even then, the biggest baddest newest, might not be the best for you.
Let me give you a little history on my digital journey. I’ve had 3 digital cameras ( I did say I’m not the ‘upgrade at earliest possible opportunity’ type). In over a decade of my main income coming from the photography industry, that isn’t a lot. I don’t think it is at least, but who knows. The real point is that when I like something I just use it until I can’t, so keep that in mind as I go through some of my thoughts on our modern capture equipment. My needs might be different from yours, and a camera is nothing but a tool after all. If my job is smashing nails, I might like a hammer, but if your job is turning screws my hammer is probably not your first choice. I should also mention that a big part of my photographic career has been working as a digital tech and a retoucher, so I’ve worked on files from A LOT of different cameras. Whether that was only tethered capture, or only retouching, or both, lets just say I’ve seen and manipulated more different types of files than most.
So, those sensors…. how important are they, really? I’m going to sort of tread a line here, and say that yes they are important, but it doesn’t have much at all to do with the megapixel count. There was a huge race over really the last decade, more more more more more megapixels. I think in the earlier days of digital capture, there was some merit to this. I mean 4mp is a pretty small file, and there really isn’t any way around that. It limits your ability to crop, it limits the amount of detail you can capture, and the sizes at which the image can be printed.
These days however, I would actually argue that on just about any new camera, there are plenty of pixels for most uses. Here’s the thing, lenses are better, the sensors are better, and whether you want to hear it or not 15-20 is plenty even for a billboard. Now for large fine art prints, this may or may not be true, but are you selling 40x60” prints for $25,000? If you are, you don’t need me to tell you what tools you should use and I need you to teach me some marketing. If you’re not, then my point stands and we can move on from the pixel count.
The next biggest decision you’ll need to make is sensor size. The most common choice in DSLR cameras is probably ‘full-frame’ which means ‘the same size as 35mm film’. In full-frame cameras, everything acts the same as your 35mm cameras, and with most manufacturers, at least some of your older lenses can be put into use. You’ll get the same perspective from the same focal length, the same depth of field for the same aperture, etc. If you have a Nikon F3 for instance that you shoot some film on, it would make a lot of sense for your versatility and your wallet to get a full-frame Nikon DLSR like the D750 that Melissa shoots with, so your lenses can cross over. There’s a bonus to this method too, in that even without all the modern coatings and ‘better’ glass, there can definitely be some charm to those older lenses. The cream of the crop has always been the true medium format size sensors (there are a few, but we’re talking about stuff like the Phase One 6x4.5 or 6x7cm). These sensors usually come with a ton of pixels and a corresponding price tag of tons of dollars. You do get a massive amount of detail, and you also get a bit more shallow depth of field for your aperture setting, along with a certain feel that can’t be replicated with other systems. If you love shooting at 2.8 and having minimal elements in focus, this probably sounds like a dream, but the price can certainly be prohibitive. Also, something to keep in mind is that a lot of lenses don’t perform their best at their widest apertures, so you may find that to get actual sharpness you are stopping down, and ending up with a similar depth of field to your 35mm camera. The other consideration could be the frame format, in that MF sensors are more square, or at least closer to a standard 8x10 shape. I tend to prefer those aspect ratios over the more rectangular 35mm, but we also have to remember that with today’s sensors, we can hit our images with a little crop with no worries at all. It might sound like I’m hating on the big MF systems, but I’m not, I do actually love them regardless of all the quirks. There is one of those things that is hard to put your finger on, but the files from those big cameras are pretty amazing. There is a new crop of what I will call ‘schmeduim’ format cameras (slightly smaller sensors but still bigger than 35mm) from Fujifilm and Hasselblad that offer a lot of the MF advantages and a few less of the disadvantages, mainly that they are small enough that you might bring them with you somewhere outside of the studio. I have shot models from both companies, and personally, I love them. If I was made of money I wouldn’t spend it all, but I would have a Fuji GFX 50R and 2-3 of their excellent prime lenses. These cameras are similar in size to a modern DSLR, and in the case of the Fuji it’s actually incredibly light. This hits a sweet spot for me, of being able to walk around with the same big sensor I would love to use in a studio setting. That being said, unless someone has one they want to donate then it’s all irrelevant for now, so let’s move on to the last system.
The one remaining format, which is actually what I shoot and what inspired this article, is that little APS-C or ‘Crop’ sensor. APS-C sensors are smaller than 35mm, but you can usually use your full-frame lenses. Since the sensor takes up a smaller portion of the image circle of the lens, it will effectively lengthen the focal length of your lenses, but if you are all Nikon for instance, that cool old 50mm you have will work, it’ll just look like a 75mm. This can make wide-angle work tough without dedicated lenses, and if you already shoot 35mm, this means you may have to have some glass that is specific to your camera. In my case, I am still shooting a 16mp, APS-C sensor Fujifilm X-Pro1 (every image in this article was made with this camera). It is wayyy old for a digital camera, and while I will at some point upgrade to the 3 to get a little extra detail, there is nothing about that camera that holds me back for most of my work. Here’s the thing, Fuji worked a little bit of magic and did something entirely different than anyone else with their X-Trans sensors and to me, aside from gaining that sensor size with MF, it really is my favorite system to work with. Rather than the traditional 4x4 RGBG ‘Bayer’ array, Fuji basically arranged the different colored pixels in a far more randomized way, which leads to a pretty amazing effect on the files. As both a film lover, and digital professional, and someone who can often guess the type of camera used in an image, the Fuji sensor gets this whole thing right. The images feel more organic to me, with smoother transitions. The look of the images renders any lack of sensor size or megapixels completely irrelevant for my personal work. Would I like some additional sharpness sometimes, sure, but do I absolutely need it for the way that I work? Not really, at this time at least.
I do think your sensor matters, but I don’t think it’s all about the pixel count, or even the sensor size. I think the most important thing, is how all of those qualities combine with the lenses you like to use, and if you like that complete system for your particular style of work.
It’s yet another area where there is no ‘right’ answer, and it’s up to us as artists to experiment and try to define our own styles. Get in the comments section below, and let us know what you shoot and why! Is it all about image quality for you, or do the camera’s ergonimics, or the editing software it plays nicely with have a big effect on your decision?
