The Tech + Photo Blog

In the world of digital photography, the megapixel battle is no spring chicken. It has been raging for several years. Absurd, but that’s a pretty long time span in terms of digital photography.

Today it seems as though digitals have gotten to the point where pixel-count mania — at least in the D-SLR and Point-and-shoot world — is finally sputtering out. Sure, Canon recently introduced a 21-megapixel D-SLR slayer (the EOS-1Ds Mark III) but that’s infringing on the “medium format” territory. That particular camera is battling on grounds with leafbacks and is certainly overkill for all but the most demanding large prints.

What seems to be making a run for supremacy in the “need-to-have” category for new prosumer and pro digital cameras is clean high-ISO images. One can make a solid case for the fact that Canon has always been ahead of the curve in noise control, offering clean images at higher and higher ISO ratings.

With the recent introduction of its newest digital camera bodies (the D300 and D3), Nikon seems to be making a rather bold statement. That is:

Hey! We’ve reached the megapixel plateau. Images are already cleaner, sharper and more colorful than those from our antiquated 35mm gear. How would you like to shoot in near-darkness without a flash?

Now the second part of that statement may be slightly over-hyped, but it’s not far off. As digital sensors become more accurate, increased sensitivity to light is becoming more of a reality. Nikon are now poised to turn the tables on Canon and other manufacturers with new sensors that offer very usable images at ISO 6400 and beyond (even up to the equivalent of ISO 25,600!). I’ve looked at some full-resolution shots from pre-production Nikon D3 models and let me say that the results at ISO 6400 are very clean [See this image from a Nikon D3 at 6400 ISO].

Now of course this is both good and bad for the industry. Good because it spurs true innovation that is beyond sheer megapixel numbers. Bad because bright (reads: expensive) lenses are going to become even less important in the equation for good event/action/journalistic photographs. This point is oversimplified in the one sentence I’ve afforded it, but it only serves to give the most recent example of a reoccurring message in the consumer technology field:

Consumers at large want “easier, smaller, cheaper” more so than “harder, larger, costlier”.

Now, these cameras aren’t exactly aimed at the consumer end of the market, but the technology will trickle down. The end result is that, as you glance at your camera bag — shiny polarizing filters glistening through the energy saving halogen haze that lights your living room — your 17-35mm 2.8 lens is looking more like a $1,500 paperweight every day.

To end on a completely tangent societal side-note (as if I hadn’t strayed far enough already), I suppose we should just enjoy the whole “easier, smaller, cheaper” revolution, but gosh it seems like something is going to give eventually. And that something isn’t going to be our society’s obsession with contents of said revolution.

At any rate, I’m rather looking forward to the launch of the D300/D3. Purblindly yours…

-PL

Popularity: 16% [?]