Back in 2009, when I made my living photographing stock imagery, the size of the images we could license made a difference in our potential for sales. Photos were sold based on how big the file was (in megapixels), so photographers with large-megapixel cameras had a more competitive edge over those of us who did not. At the time, I was using a Nikon D200, a 12-megapixel camera, and felt pressured to upgrade. When it was obvious that Nikon (at the time) was not going to come out with anything with more than 12-megapixels, I decided to make the move to Canon, which already had a hefty 21-megapixel 5DMarkII in their inventory.
Now, my career has slightly shifted. I still shoot stock (you can see my growing portfolio on Stocksy), but it is not my main focus. In fact, over 90% of my income is derived from sales through products I create for my online shop, the Nicolesy Store, and I also write articles and share photos through social media. The photos I use are typically consumed by other people on a screen (phone, laptop, tablet), so technically I don’t really need a camera that creates 20+ megapixels. I just need something that makes images that are large enough for the content I create.
I’ve also been thinking a lot about the mirrorless cameras out there right now, especially the Fuji and Sony systems. I own a 16-megapixel Fuji X-T1, but I have also had the chance to play around with the Sony a7 series cameras and lenses, too. While there is no denying that the quality of the Sony full-frame sensors is amazing (especially the brand-new 42.4-megapixel Sony a7RII), is that more than we need? Sure, everyone has their own uses and preferences, but when does the amount of megapixels start to become overkill … or does it?
Here are some points to ponder, both “for” and “against” the need for a large megapixel camera:
- For: Printing is probably one of the biggest reason to have a huge sensor. As the print sizes get larger and larger, a higher-megapixel camera is more desirable.
- Against: Most of what we share is online, and people rarely share full resolution images online (and if they do, a user would need to zoom in to see it up-close). When I share to Instagram from my Fuji X-T1 or Canon 6D, they are resized down to 1024×1024 pixels. That’s tiny compared to the size the image started with! And most other images, whether they are on Facebook or a blog, can only be viewed as large as the screen they are on (which is definitely not over 20 megapixels).
- For: A higher-megapixel image allows you to get more aggressive with your cropping and still have a decent-sized image.
- Against: The more megapixels, the greater the need for memory card and hard-drive storage. In fact, my husband just gave me two 32GB SD cards that he was planning on getting rid of because they were too small for his 42-megapixel Sony a7RII! (Score!)
- Against: Large RAW files require very fast and updated computer processors to make edits. Older computers or antiquated versions of software may have a difficult time working with extremely large files.
I’m not saying that high-megapixel cameras don’t have their place, in fact, if Fuji came out with a 30-megapixel X-series camera, I would probably be adding it to my camera collection as soon as it came out. :) There is no denying that having extra wiggle-room for editing, cropping, or just to create more detail is ideal. I just don’t see the need to base an entire purchasing decision around the number of megapixels a camera has. It’s one feature out of many. In the coming months I’m going to take a crack at printing my own photographs at home, and I’m curious to see if that will alter my opinion on megapixels and how many I actually require for my photography.
Good stuff to think about. I was never a fan of more being better in the Mega Pixel game, and I have produced very respectable 30×40’s with 6.1 mega pixels. Photographers should be focusing more on correct exposure and camera settings to get the best out of their gear. I personally am very content with the 12 megapixel Nikon D3s and feel this fits a good workflow at a reasonable image size for storage.
Reblogged this on myphotofeeds.
Good points! I personally feel that most megapixel discussions out there are driven by the manufacturerers marketing machine. Plus the higher the pixel count and larger sensor, the better glass you’ll need to take full advantage. I think the X-T1 strikes a perfect balance.
Very interested to read your views on number of megapixels think thr quality of the megapixels must be a factor and I believe that the quality can vary greatly. Am I right in this?
I have an old Nikon 5 megapixel camera that takes far better shots tha other cameras of mine that have many more megapixels. Results must depend on many camera features other than megapixels?
Niall, Dublin, Ireland
The ideal size sensor in todays world is likely between 16 mb to 24mb for majority of event shooters (and 12 mb also), do we really need more. 12mb still works if the photographer takes the time to compose and zoom into the area he wants and great examples include the Nikon D700 FX and D3 FX still great at photos. Most portrait or event shooters might be content between 12mb to 16mb to 24mb for most photos with good technique. 36mb to 42mb to 50mb are for landscape, architecture or very large print purposes, however also very useful for… Read more »
As a camera club member, I do print a number of my images. The maximum size if a mounted image is 40cm by 50cm. From a Sony Alpha 77 with 24 mp, this means that I usually print at 400+ dpi, far more than is actually needed. So why do I need more pixels?
I am also of the opinion that the quality of the glass in front of the sensor is at least as important as the sensor itself, as has been suggested by others.
Megapixels and size matters to a stock photographer
Why? What’s the largest you’ve been asked for?
I hear ya. It is/was more important to me when I was shooting stock because of the potential for larger image sales. If a customer requires an XL+ size image, then those photos that are too small are not even possible sales.
Good points! I personally feel that most megapixel discussions out there are driven by the manufacturerers marketing machine. Plus the higher the pixel count and larger sensor, the better glass you’ll need to take full advantage. I think the X-T1 strikes a perfect balance.
Reblogged this on myphotofeeds.
Very interested to read your views on number of megapixels think thr quality of the megapixels must be a factor and I believe that the quality can vary greatly. Am I right in this?
I have an old Nikon 5 megapixel camera that takes far better shots tha other cameras of mine that have many more megapixels. Results must depend on many camera features other than megapixels?
Niall, Dublin, Ireland
Good stuff to think about. I was never a fan of more being better in the Mega Pixel game, and I have produced very respectable 30×40’s with 6.1 mega pixels. Photographers should be focusing more on correct exposure and camera settings to get the best out of their gear. I personally am very content with the 12 megapixel Nikon D3s and feel this fits a good workflow at a reasonable image size for storage.
Megapixels and size matters to a stock photographer
I hear ya. It is/was more important to me when I was shooting stock because of the potential for larger image sales. If a customer requires an XL+ size image, then those photos that are too small are not even possible sales.
Why? What’s the largest you’ve been asked for?
As a camera club member, I do print a number of my images. The maximum size if a mounted image is 40cm by 50cm. From a Sony Alpha 77 with 24 mp, this means that I usually print at 400+ dpi, far more than is actually needed. So why do I need more pixels?
I am also of the opinion that the quality of the glass in front of the sensor is at least as important as the sensor itself, as has been suggested by others.
The ideal size sensor in todays world is likely between 16 mb to 24mb for majority of event shooters (and 12 mb also), do we really need more. 12mb still works if the photographer takes the time to compose and zoom into the area he wants and great examples include the Nikon D700 FX and D3 FX still great at photos. Most portrait or event shooters might be content between 12mb to 16mb to 24mb for most photos with good technique. 36mb to 42mb to 50mb are for landscape, architecture or very large print purposes, however also very useful for… Read more »