The Image Quality Myth
If you spend any time on YouTube, reading camera blogs, or visiting camera shops, you will be bombarded with the latest gear that will be presented in a way to make you feel like you need it in order to get good photos. The goal for the marketing team is to make you feel like you’re missing out. To make you feel that the new feature is what stands between you and the results you want.
If you pay attention to the features that are heavily pushed, they are usually one of the following:
Improved AF
Better subject tracking
More focus points
Higher burst rate
More megapixels
Some kind of smart feature such as wireless phone tethering
More speed (readout or write)
Something with AI in the title
Some kind of gimmick such as in-camera image stitching for 10,000-megapixel photos.
For most people, these crazy features are not essential. They sound amazing, and they might wow you, but once the honeymoon phase is over, I bet most people will never use them again.
A few years ago, I used to run 1:1 workshops in London, and I can tell you from real-world experience that most people only care about ergonomics, a little bit of autofocus, and a lot about image quality. Most people want the best image quality.
Although cameras have advanced significantly, the elephant in the room is that image quality hasn’t improved significantly in a long time. Not long ago, I was going through old photos and spent some time editing a few shots from 2019 that I took on my Fuji XT3, a 5-year-old camera.
If I’m totally honest, I could not see any difference between the XT3 photo and today’s XT5 shot aside from the extra resolution. Of course, if I pixel peep and start pulling the files to the absolute extreme, yes, the XT5 has a tiny bit more dynamic range, but to be honest, we are splitting hairs here.
Fujifilm XT3
Fujifilm XT5
Another example is when I upgraded from a Fuji 35mm f2 to the 33mm f1.4. Of course, the 33 is sharper, faster, and with more pleasant background blur, but can I easily pick them apart by simply looking at a photo? Absolutely not, at least not without zooming in or comparing f2 vs. f1.4 image quality.
Fujifilm 33 f1.4
Fujifilm 35mm f2
We can conclude that image quality, the very thing most of us are chasing, hasn’t really progressed all that much. Of course, if you upgrade from a 5-year-old camera and kit lens to a new system with the latest prime, you will see a jump in the image, just not as big of a jump as you were led to believe.
Now, let’s talk about why so many chase image quality. The simple answer is that most people chase image quality because they think it will give them quality images, but this could not be further from the truth. I was one of those people when I started photography. I was convinced that having high image quality meant it was an amazing photo. An image that has perfect corner-to-corner sharpness, no artifacts, amazing contrast, incredible color reproduction, and zero distortion is a technically good image. However, none of that matters if the light sucks, the composition is off, and there’s nothing interesting to look at. On the other hand, you can get an image that has none of the technical points I just mentioned, but it does have great light, composition, story, and subject. Despite the technical shortcomings, most people will gravitate to an image with great light, composition, story, and subject.
Anyone can easily buy image quality, but no one can buy a quality image. A quality image requires dedication, patience, practice, and work ethic. Image quality only requires a credit card. So next time you’re itching to upgrade your camera, stop and think. If you want better image quality, go ahead. If you want better quality images, perhaps spend that money on putting you and your camera in front of interesting things.
If you found this blog helpful and wish to learn more about photography & travel while having direct access to me, please consider joining my Patreon community.
