I'm an amateur currently owning a Canon 700D and a few lenses (18-55, 10-18, 55-250 and 50 1.8 STM). As I try to do some stock photography, image quality is my main concern, and 700D has a very average sensor scoring only 61 at dxomark. I've heard dxomark ratings shouldn't be taken literally, but Canon APS-C sensors are known for poor performance for both DR and noise, and this is the case for 700D. I'm on a limited budget, so going full frame is out of my reach. Nikon APS-C cameras have about 10% larger sensor and don't have low pass filter, giving sharper images with less noise. I prefer Canon aesthetics more, but my main concern is image quality - do you think I should switch to Nikon or maybe the gains in IQ wouldn't be worth the cost (again, I'm selling stock photography, so with better image quality I could possibly sell more and cover the cost of the switch)?
Answer
The most important thing for stock photography is composition/artistic vision.
Next is proper technique which involves both the skill of the photographer and, for things such as night architectural work and most nature photography, proper hardware such as a sturdy tripod.
Next comes high quality lenses.
Only when all of these have been taken care of do minor differences in sensor performance matter. There are good techniques that have allowed many photographers to produce stock images of outstanding quality with far less camera than a Canon 700D.
Switching from one consumer grade APS-C camera to another consumer grade APS-C camera may slightly make up for some shortcomings in technique, but it will not make any material difference in the overall quality of your stock photos.
No comments:
Post a Comment