|
One thing that has occurred to me recently is just how good some quite early digital cameras were even compared to the latest kit.
Certainly if you want to print an image the size of the side of a house and and study how sharp the subject matter is from about 20 cms away you probably need a very high end and large modern sensor.
But for the majority of use cases that just does not matter.
Which is why the the tiny sensors (forget the number of pixels) used by phones are perfectly adequate for probably 99% of all images shared in the world today.
And why the traditional camera market sales have been slumping for years, especially the convenience or pocket cameras.
Given good light there is probably not that much difference for practical purposes between image from 2005 and now.
Given poor light the margin of difference would be wider unless seeking an "artistic" effect - in which case just about anything goes of could be made persuasive as "art" rather than, say, a dodgy, out of focus panning shot that digital manipulation has allowed to become 'interesting'.
Nice pics Bob. Thanks for taking the time to dig them out of the archives.
|