As with any video that suddenly breaks previous channel viewer numbers, this one has attracted a few people who disagree with some of my points. Most have valid comments, often around the fact that a higher resolution image allows for more cropping. Of course, this is true, but there's so many variables to consider. Firstly, remember that most photographs will never be printed and so will be most likely viewed on a 2.1mp display - that being the common standard of 1080p. From a 20mp image, that's a lot of potential cropping. The example of bird photography is a common point raised and to this I would say that specialist subjects generally benefit from specialist and expensive gear and, clearly, I am not aiming my video at someone who's a newbie in a specialist genre - frankly anybody looking to get into such things probably needs to be watching the content of people like Simon D'entremont who makes a living from wildlife. Where people have valid comments for or against my content here, I welcome their input. I am far from the most knowledgeable person in this field and I wish to fill gaps in my knowledge and reasoning. But anyone that wishes to argue by giving weak ifs and buts, is on a fast track to being ignored. Yes, I know that someone with zero knowledge of exposure is likely to get a better exposed image with one of the program control modes rather than manual - what is precisely your point? My point was that all the exposure modes control the same things, but they do them in different ways whilst all generally giving you the option of ultimate control via EV compensation and that some modes are more suited to different scenarios that others. How can anyone argue with these fundamentally factual statements? Oh, and yes, I had a skirt/long tunic on over trousers. Get over it.
Besides S.d'E, a person among the few (in UK in particular) to watch is Sean Tucker (no bs, a very decent person, but definitely Not bcs he is an ex-priest)
@@AndyBanner I'd put it this way. There is so much dubious advice out there (or even if it is undubious still might not work for everyone) that one should just get out there and snap one's photos, one can extensively experiment since it doesn't cost one $1-$1.50 every time one clicks that shutter button as it does with film. One will learn and develop one's own style that one, in the end it is more efficient than attempting to wade through all the advice. I read a book on oil painting, and one bit of advice the guy who wrote that book gave was to limit oneself to a specific time per painting, short enough that it was a challenge to finish in that time, strictly stick to that time, quit, put the painting in a closet and don't look again at any of the paintings until one has done one painting per day for 90 days, don't worry about quality, just put paint to canvas. When one finishes those 90 days then line them up in order, one will see improvement in one's skill over those 90 days and the real bonus is that one's personal style will have developed in an organic way just by not worrying about how it looks or the results. One photographer I watch on TH-cam is really frustrating because he blindly applies presets to his photos. Often his photos look better before the presets are applied, but he is so addicted to using those presets that he doesn't really slow down to consider, a shame because he actually is a talented photographer, but just doesn't stop to consider sometimes.
As someone who is just starting to dip his toe into photography, and having spent many hours looking at videos about what is the best camera, what lenses (minefield) and how to take good pictures. This video was a breath of fresh air. Many thanks.
Simple advice: buy used from a reputable company with a warranty. Even an older DSLR will get you great image quality so long as you have decent lenses. don't over spend and invest in your skills more than the gear - book a workshop or training. Get out and practice. Use your phone - it's remarkably capable. Oh, and of course, subscribe to my channel...
I wouldn't recommend a film camera unless you have deep pockets. Photography was never a cheap hobby, but what you'll save in gear will be very quickly spent on film and processing. It's a great way to learn as you become more focused on the task because of the cost, but learning will be slow because of processing time. Get a semi-modern digital camera and work methodically.
Watching this was refreshing. Fifty years ago, when I was 15 years old, I probably took better photographs with a basic 35 mm rangefinder camera than I have taken since because I was concerned about the composition of the image. I understood the camera settings because they fascinated me and being a curious boy I had read up on them and experimented. Remember that changing the ISO setting on a film camera means changing the film so not an option while out and about. I left school at 16 and my interest, and my pictures, led to me becoming a photographer's assistant in Maurice Rickards' (look him up) small and creative photographic and graphic London studio. I then became the photographer at the studio. Maurice sold the business to concentrate on his writing. I was no good at winning new clients however and the design business also declined so after 8 years I was out of a job. What's the point of this ramble? Being a professional photographer involves much more than taking photographs, it involves marketing, making and keeping contacts and meeting the client's requirements or if you take photographs on spec marketing those photographs in a crowded market. Being an amateur means enjoying what you do and having no-one to please but yourself. To complete my personal story I moved into IT and had a successful career.
I hear breathlessness in the delivery, and whenever I hear that I have to say get the heart checked. Excellent points concerning common pitfalls in understanding photography.
Thanks for the concern. I am a mostly unfit past-middle-aged human lacking in motivation. I am a over weight and seriously depressed. Most days, I don't much care if I wake up again. Comments like yours really help me realise that it probably is worth sticking around. Thank you.
Great video! I've watched you for two years now I think. Great advice! When I first got my camera I was sitting on the patio faffing with the settings to learn, just shooting random stuff that caught my eye. Our lawn was over grown and I liked the way the sun was hitting some tall grass and took a photo. It came out really well! When my daughter saw it, she was jealous of it LOL. She has more experience than I do and was so mad I took it just messing around. Thank you for the good advice
Loved the video. So much good advice. I’ve dabbled in photography for years. Two years ago I got more serious. I watched thousands of hours of how to, which camera, which lens etc. I’ve learned lots but come to the conclusion only I can make myself a better photographer. And it’s a long process. I’m constantly told I need this camera/lens, and I don’t. Any half decent camera is way better than I need. I’ve learned that as someone who wants to take landscape photographs there’s no point listening to what is the perfect camera from a street, portrait photographer or videographer.
Another great video Andy. Marketing does seem to drive the assumption that more pixels must be better. I know it’s a little off topic, but, as an amateur astronomer I’m often asked about cameras for taking pictures of the night sky - quite commonly “should I buy camera x because it has more megapixels”. Bigger pixels (so normally fewer megapixels for a given sensor size) can really help improve the signal to noise ratio, important when taking photos of such faint targets. There are other things to consider of course, but your point on pixel count rings true here as well.
I started my photography journey about 4 year's ago, and I fell into the trap of watching loads of TH-cam videos giving advice, some good some bad, but I found from watching one video to another video, you get bombarded with so much contradictory advice, that's my experience anyway.
The problem is that as an inexperienced person in any field, it can be difficult to know what advice is good or bad. Strangely, the best and unbiased advice is often in the thick camera manual that too few people read.
Great points. After doing photography 60 years it is interesting to see people convinced that their SLR camera is outdated and jump onto the latest mirrorless camera expenses. Not complaining because the Canon 5DMkIV can be bought used and are more than adequate so I bought 2 bodies used at a good price. A Canon tech guy confirmed this and his point that after 4 generations this camera is as good as it gets and that the new designs are starting all over in the refinement cycles.
Yes, indeed. The 5d Mk 4 is a real workhorse loved by professional photographers the world over. The fact is that there's been very few significant image quality enhancements over the last few years and, actually, when you think about it, just how much better can it get? There's no point in generating a reproduction that the human eye cannot perceive. Advancements are more likely in computational capabilities in future and we've probably reach peak image quality and the fight will become over resolution which, again, very few people actually need. Colour bit depth is the other improvement possible and that's more where we can improve dynamic range which is already superior to most film anyway. Is there a size/weight advantage between a DSLR and a Mirrorless - often yes, but often also outweighed by the cost differences. The biggest advantage for me is that a mirrorless is built for permeant live view which is a tool I find most useful.
@@AndyBanner I use Live View most often because it translates the image into a 2D space with a frame to better preview of the final image composition. That was one aspect of working with large format that has stayed with me. The few image enhancements for my system, if needed can be gained with DxO Pure Raw. I agree the PhotoLab program is a great way to go (I bought it) but I need the TK plugins with Photoshop for even more control. Diminishing returns have arrived in the hardware but the software is extending the capabilities. The biggest NEED now is . . . time in the field, both literally and figuratively.
This is the first time I see a video from your channel and I cannot agree more with all what you've said and how you approach to your photography is. I've started with photography almost 4 years ago and as you've said it was easier to check on videos than reading my camera manual... so I've fallen on all those bad and contradictory advices you can find on TH-cam. What I hate the most is the new trend "pro and newbie / amateur" stuff... or the "use these settings to get good pictures"... and of course "this is my new favourite/best/sharpest lens"... video sponsored by... the manufacturer :o) I thank you for the 28 minutes of fresh air. Good new year for you an all the viewers.
When I got my first camera, Pentax K-r I did not know anything. What helped me best was trying different priority modes by myself and just shoot anything. To experience what every priority modes does, to experience differences between them with realtime examples. And then I had my own experience which I could use to decide which mode is best for me. I use mostly Manual, because I like that mode, but I dont see any problem to use other priority mode, if you think that in your situation it would be better. I see lot of these videos you are mentioning and 95% of them are talking on loop about same stuff. They talks about stuff what could be explained in 1 minute around 10 minutes and I often consider them as clickbaits for new photographers. I mean if you need some baseline information and you are lazy to learn it by trying or reading manual, its good starting point, but photography is art. You are artist and its entirely up to you, how you decide approach your art.
Ahhh the best settings question, my reply is when asked "the settings that get you the shot" mine won't work because that moment in time, light/conditions has gone
It's not just light and conditions, it's location, distance to subject, gear. It's literally every variable that combines to make a photograph. The problem with these question is not the questions themselves but anyone who answers them with definitive settings.
@@AndyBanner although in saying that(my last reply ) I have had many people who followed me on twitter from the UK ask me what settings for the nightscapes i take, and that is more them expecting my settings to work over there and they just won't due to my very good bortle 1-2 sky
I have never subscribed to the idea that s larger sensor is required to get good images and I certainly argued against the idea of “zooming with your feet.” In fact, it was a the 10x zoom of my first ever point and shoot that got me hooked! Now I use aps-c cameras, but only because my point and shoot camera was not capable of focusing fast enough to capture my my children performing indoors and in low light.
Some good words spoken here, to add I would always say 'shot for yourself, unless your being paid to do a job' and always look behind you 'cos the light/image/comp maybe better.
My problem with a lot of photography youtube videos are they're far too beginner-focussed. Why are there so many videos that assume viewers are all 'beginners'? And why do so many think they need to add yet more to them? Or even just too "instruction" focussed. I don't want to be _taught_ photography, or told what to do, or not do, I just like to watch people doing it.
I think that if you follow people like Tom Heaton, Nigel Danson, Henry Turner, Simon Booth and Simon Baxter, you'll get exactly that. Oh, and me obviously.
I totally agree with you. Not only is a lot of what you read or hear from "TH-camrs" is a repeat of what someone has heard and not based on their own empirical testing and work. I have found that very few people actually do the work and base their comments on first-hand experience. I specialize in analog large and ultra large format photography, but your comments apply to any type of photography. Glad I found your channel.
A lot of what people say and believe is from comments rather than learned experiences and other education. Much of it also acts directly on existing biases which people don't want to be challenged on. We're all guilty of this to some extent and cognitive dissonance plays a big part too. I try to be mindful of this and wish to be as open-minded as possible because I absolutely understand that what I know and believe can be inaccurate or plain wrong on occasion. I generally try to make it clear when I am giving an opinion rather than stating facts. Of course, not everybody listens and will just cherry pick what triggers them into reaction or retention, ignoring the context and reframing things. To err is human.
"Never use a tripod, I hate lugging these around" was the first bit of YT advice I was happy to dispense with, while I do often do my best to get the shot hand held... a tripod is hardly a heavy load these days and,... good lord... can it enable the right shots in tough conditions. I do rely considerably on my ability to crop, so the d850, from Nikon, while aged for a modern camera, provides ample forgiving resolution to readjust and fix my shortcomings.
Nowt wrong with cropping. Elliot Erwitt famously cropped. The d850 is a beast of a camera - I would have liked to be able to justify one some years ago.
Great video Andy and sage advice. I would disagree (to a point) with your definition of the difference between a pro and an amateur. Expertise might be a factor when looking at a new amateur photographer vs a pro, but in general I'd argue that the only real difference is that a pro gets paid to take pictures while an amateur does it mostly for the love of the image or process. anyway, whatever - nice jacket 🙂
Yes, of course, the dictionary definition of a pro is someone who gets paid to carry out a service. Too many people feel that it's otherwise of course and use it as some kind of "I know what I am talking about" definition. I know there's plenty of "pro" photographers who are actually bloody awful. At best, some of them are mere shutter pressers working to prescriptive instructions. I would consider myself a pro inland boat pilot who's experienced tug boat operators with oodles more boat handling experience than I totally foul up manoeuvre after manoeuvre. Some lorry drivers are shockingly bad at driving. Like I say, be careful what BS you believe. I don't wear that coat very often these days. It was purchased on my honeymoon a very long time ago as a coat for bombing about in my Morgan. As you can see, I still have the coat. Just about still have the wife. Sadly, the car is somebody else's now. Be well, Nick
Every self titled 'photographer ' on youtube is a professional guru in their opinion. Andrew, I agree 100%. Lots of tossers on the web claiming to be the know it alls!
Truth. Ive been shooting professionally for nearly 40 years and I do not consider myself an "expert." The more I know, the more I know what I don't know. Any expert opinion is just that, an opinion. If ypu don't learn something new every day, you're not progressing.
@@dangilmore9724 So true - and yet some of what I learn many days are little trips and tricks I pick up from these”gurus” on TH-cam. To stop looking at their videos because some of them are full of themselves is a bit of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
That depends on just how much tosh you can suffer. If you have to sit through hours of garbage in hope of a nugget, you probably have too much time on your hands.
@ I don’t agree. There are many bs photo videos but you can quickly identify them and ignore them in future. But there are some excellent presenters from whom you can learn. Even if it’s only a tip or two, it’s still good to hear their approach and admire their beautiful images. You can’t tar the whole community with one brush.
I am not trying to. The biggest culprits tend to be those making their way up the greasy YT pole. Those at the top are there because they are good at what they do and aren't pretending to be anything they are not.
"More megapixels doesn't make better photos" may be true if you are shooting landscapes or portraits. But, if you are shooting wildlife (particularly birds) and have to crop your photos, more megapixels can absolutely be helpful.
Yes, there are a few situations where more resolution is better or where you're compensating for having a shorter focal length. Specialist situations require more specialist tools.
To some extent I do agree. For me if shooting wildlife it is getting the right shutter and settings then I can get some amazing results with my 20 megapixels at A4 printing.
The ability to crop into images is a useful feature. People like Elliott Erwitt and Arnold Newman shot medium and large format for precisely this reason. The 60MP on the Leica Q3 enables multiple fields of view without needing to change lenses. It's really useful. You could argue it's a gimmick, but I use it for professional work all the time.
Indeed. I actually interviewed Elliot Erwitt once: long time ago. Knowing how to properly make the most out of a tool is the key to its benefits. For most people, Black and Decker is sufficient, for someone that needs the power and precision and can make the most of it they'll go for Festool.
@@ihateunicorns867 In Sept 1993 I ran into a younger Erwitt (a son?) working for the Daily News in the last Wigstock held in the East Village. I used OC flash (by cable to the detachable sensor in the hotshoe; deep shades under the summer trees) & a 16mm fisheye (portrait orientation, no AF) to shoot the costumed trans. 12x16 c-prints (from cut paper) were hand made the next day in a friend's lab. By mid Dec (having missed a 15-hr flight 6 days earlier; printing for my late friend, a forensic pathologist), I called it my last day in a darkroom. By 2010 it was all digital ; there's no return although I'm still keeping some film cameras & lenses. Having grown up on Agfachromes (more "affordable" for a kid) I DoNot RAW !! {Time is better spent shooting & on math.}
As a new amateur photographer, i have done 75% of my photography on the job driving a truck locally picking up milk at dairy farms. It amazes me how many great shots ive gotten!
I have been using Aperture priority for the 16 years that I have been involved in digital photography. For me Aperture is the very first thing I set depending upon the subject and the amount of Depth of field is need, next i set ISO depending upon the amount of light and subject, if it is a landscape photography is take into consideration will i be using a tripod or hand held and do i need every thing sharp or some motion shown. If it's wildlife i use a 100-400mm Fujifilm lens and I use a higher ISO. Lastly I use exposure compensation to make adjustments to exposure, shooting in this way I have been able to photograph a variety of subjects including events.
Obviously, we should all use our gear in a way that we're happy with. There's always more than one way to achieve an outcome and some ways are more optimised for different scenarios than others. Personally, if I need to consider the shutter speed more than depth of field, the camera is switched to Shutter Priority every time - it's what it's for. But the same result can be achieved using Aperture priority. It just might take more dial movement. It's much the same as someone using the menu system to cut and paste text rather than control x and control p. We tend to stick with what we are used to because change can be difficult to effect. ISO is only ever a consideration for me if I can't capture the image properly using the actual creative exposure settings of aperture and shutter. ISO is the only one of these settings that isn't a creative choice (working on the reasonable premise that you want the best quality image capture).
This was priceless advice, for you're quite right: It's been an issue ever since the beginning of time, really... People accepting "advice" at face-value as "facts/rules". Seems we also encourage this lack of thinking for ourselves in society in this day and age. I've been shooting Olympus ever since the film days and I love my E-M1X, heavy "brick" though it may be, especially when I'm packing gear in and out of the badlands of western North Dakota. I've had more than a few scoff at my gear but that's just fine (my dad was the real pro and shooting models all of my adult life with Oly gear). I am aware of the limitations of my gear and did a lot of research before choosing to buy this setup a couple of years ago. I have always been one to experiment and the learning never really ends. Is all my gear necessary for new photographers or even for myself? Not at all... Much of it only simplifies my capture of compositions. It simply means I have more time to "see" compositions instead of just "snapshots" (I use my cameraphone for snapshots lol). The ability to "see" is far more important than how many programable function buttons one has... I always tell anyone new to photography to learn how to "see" the world around them. I shoot MOSTLY places that are not cliche shots, just to be away from those crowds and so I can shoot something that is off the beaten path that is different from everyone else (hopefully lol). Making a challenge with one's self to shoot something every day or every week, just to keep that practice in place, is often a great technique (sometimes I have to remind even myself when I begin feeling a creative rut settling in). Forgive my rambling! I enjoyed hearing this commentary today... Very refreshing, indeed. Too bad I didn't wait another year or so to buy my body, for now I can find them at half the price on the used sites and though they were introduced about 2019, they still hold their own quite well. Happy New Year and thanks for sharing these thoughts!
Good advice Andrew .I agree you can get good photos locally you just have to go and look for them I get most of mine mainly street photography in about 5 miles from were I live in a small town . Enjoy your videos a lot . Have a good new year
if you add the domain extension of 'the netherlands' to the word 'knipser' you get my subjects, most of which are located in an area with a radius of 15 km. The light changes, the seasons change. You don't need to go abroad.
Thank you. It was a surprise to hear Tom's shoutout as I had no expectation of him watching it! Hope you find the other videos valuable. There's a lot to catch up on! ;-)
@ it is not often I go back on a channel but just pick future one I like to look of. You would see from my channel that I am into landscape photography and getting into the fells in the Lake District so tend to watch related videos or ones that cover photography in general like your latest.
I just watched a video by a popular Fuji youtube reviewer saying to focus better with the Voigtlander 23 f1.2 that you should focus wide open...then stop down. Reason being that the focus peaking with Voigtlander X mount lenses was different than the native Fuji lenses. He failed to mention that the CV 23 f1.2 has severe field curvature, even though he himself did a video about it with that lens. So his entire video about focusing better with it was completely wrong
For me, the diffence in stopping and getting a decent image of a scene I may have passed by many times is simply that of inspiration. That inspiration can come in many forms. Changing seasons, the quality of light, time of day - a myriad of things. But many times, it's simply a state of mind. If I'm going through a creative "dry" period it can often help to choose a theme or give yourself a little project. Perhaps, decide to deliberately confine yourself to black and white? Or maybe choose a specific colour theme instead. BUT, don't be too rigid with this. If the project of the day enhances your inspiration, it can often lead to a great image when you break the self-imposed rule of the day 😊
Based on my (informal) tests, it doesn't seem wise to go below 16MP when the final product is a DIN A4 or US letter print of a picture with fine detail. My inkling is that this format may actually be one of the most demanding, as with smaller sizes, lower camera resolution is rather obviously sufficient, whereas with larger sizes, one is bound to look at them from further afar and not notice IQ issues at the micro level unless it is an extremely detailed picture, e.g. a very busy and layered wide-angle shot which invites close inspection. With A4, however, lack of resolving power in fine detail is easily apparent when viewed at a reasonable distance (up to what I'd consider reading distance) and can make e.g. fine lines look worse than they do on a 1080p screen. The 10MP of one of my older cameras, the E-400, are very clearly not sufficient. Does this correspond to your experience?
In truth, I don't print many images, but from a purely mathematical standpoint, your about right I think. Of the millions of images captured every day, probably less than 1% are likely to be printed as opposed to about my guess of perhaps 90% of all negative film ever exposed.
Myself and another photographer was hired to take wedding photos. He had a Sony 7R V, I had the original Canon 6D. 90% of the photos the Bride shared on social media and printed to have placed in her photo album were mine.
Too few people are prepared to admit that a camera is merely a tool and it's the operator that makes photos. That's a pretty stupid situation to admit to unwittingly of course. I really don't care what people capture images on. I will judge an image on what I see on a screen or on paper, not on the exif data.
It's always a pleasure to watch your enthusiasm and patience in teaching how simple photography can be if someone keeps the eyes open and have a look around. What I like especially is that you debunk the fairytale MFT is unusable for any good pictures that are not wildlife or macro - best regards from North-western Germany 🙂
Thank you. It's interesting that you mention the great m4/3 "issue" as I don't believe I have ever really gotten into this debate on the channel. I just quietly plug away with a body that was released in 2016. Whilst it was somewhat groundbreaking then, that was nine years ago. However, the point is that very few people really need anything "better". There's a constant debate in certain circles about how M4/3 has had its day (and some argue it never did). You might as well be arguing that cars are better than motor cycles and that because there's more cars, m-cycles must be rubbish. A better analogy is perhaps that ships are better than trucks because they can carry more goods further distances and if all you ever measured ships vs trucks in was distance and volume you would come to that uneducated belief that ships were so much better than trucks... Often what these "debates" boil.down to is people's ability to think properly whilst being aware of their own biases and cognitive dissonance.
My personal gripe is how they always suggest a suitable "entry level camera" as being one that is around £500-600 and if you check on the camera decision site these camera's are ranked in the top 200 of all digital camera's of all time.
Very good video, a few minutes from my house is a public park that i walk my dog 🐕 each morning, once the winter breaks, i bring my Fujifilm XH2 and a 100-400mm Fujifilm lens, last year I photographed a female wood duck with 6 of her little fur balls in the creek that flows along the outer perimeter of the park, in past years i have phographed a mother deer with her fawns and one occasion i photograph a mother deer nursing two fawns along the bank of the creek, it pays to have a camera ready to capture special moments in nature.
Thanks Andrew. Where is the info about your holiday lets, and how one registers an interest in a workshop? Be interested in both. Thanks. So many traps that I fall into it would be good to get some re-setting!! Cheers.
I’m only n enthusiastic photographer and I love having 40mpx because sometimes when reviewing my photos on the larger computer screen I see compositions I missed when taking the photo and can extensively crop if required. Maybe I should slow right down when taking photos to consider more composition options at the time.
Yes. The biggest advantage of a high mp camera for most users is the ability to crop and still have a lot of pixels to work with. In other words, you have salvageability. It's rather debatable as to how much (if at all) this leeway improves your ability as a photographer as you allude. One of my biggest bugbears is the "Straight out of camera" people... I'll be broaching that nugget sometime.
I think , understand how the exposure triangle relates to a camera then take loads and loads of photos, then print a lot , the good the bad and the wonderful, I found it really moved me on to handle and look at an image.
I mostly stopped watching "photography youtube", because rather than focusing on the art, youtubers are obsessed with gear - and keep trying to convince me that my m43 camera's sensor is somehow not good enough anymore. This is a nice change of pace.
Yeah, well I have rarely engaged with people who want to argue that m4/3 is in some way deficient. They are often the kind of person who would argue that Ford and a Bentley are fundamentally different modes of transport.
I rarely use a tripod for stability. I use it because it's an essential tool for my work flow, especially in woodland where an image can make or break in the unsteady movement of the human body over a couple of inches. Tripods are much more than just stabilisers.
I have a big question here, I don't know nothing about photography really I've watched videos and I'm reading some books but I was wondering if it was possible to film in a decent resolution the spots where I believe there are good shots simply video it and then afterwards when I go through the video take still frames from that video. Is that allowed It's a silly question Is that allowed... The reason why I'm asking is because when I use my mobile I've got a Samsung galaxy s23 plus and when I do video I can take still frames from the video and I don't miss a trick and I seem to get many shots that I wouldn't be able to get if I was actually snapping. Does that make any sense? And could I do the same thing with my camera I recently purchased a camera and I can take still shots but as I was saying I don't want to miss a shot so is videoing allowed and then take still frames from that video? Let's say I was filming where you are and there was that fork in the path kind of like too pathways to the unknown and you're taking it from the single pathway looking at that fork in the path that would be a good shot but would it be a crime to video it and then take stills from it I don't know how many times I have said that or how to explain it exactly but I find that it's a pretty good way of getting some shots. I apologise I've only just woke up and it is 5:00 a.m. so my words probably aren't getting across properly ADHD doesn't help either lol
I get what you're saying and, at base level it sounds perfectly reasonable. Sadly, when you drill down into how video works, the viability of this begins to fall apart. There are many factors, but let's start with resolution: The highest common video resolution is 4K and in megapixel terms, just 8.3. Sounds high, but it's not really. Yes, I know your phone can do 8K too, but look at the size of the sensor. It's tiny. To avoid motion blur, you need to be very steady and have a lot of light and whilst this has little effect on video, every still is likely to have some blur from movement. Then there's the colour depth and the fact that the video frame compression is going to seriously degrade the image. Again, a lot of this is can be unnoticeable in the video, but much more so in the stills. And that compression seriously impacts the editability of the still also. Basically, if you want to get a good photograph, take a photograph. If you want a good video, take a video. The two things appear to be much the same but their method of capture and storage are so different as to make each unsuitable for crossover. There will be lucky exceptions, obviously.
Hmm, That's a bit like asking what are the Best Settings. Use you phone and don't spend any money until you have a good understanding of what kind of photography floats your boat and then buy a low-cost used camera and lens that fits your kind of photography - crucially, visit a camera store and HOLD the cameras you're considering. If you buy a camera you don't like holding, you won't want to use it.
Don't worry about sensor size or mega pixels or how fancy a camera is. Learn about lighting and composition, if you do that you will begin to create great photos with what ever camera is in your hands.
Hello Andrew, thanks for the video, as a newbie I can already understand what you’re saying as I’ve watched many many hours of YT videos during the last 6 months of 2024. May I ask which camera bag you were using there (3:45 in the video) as I’m looking for one and after trying several now I’m still looking. I’m not looking for a rucksack type, but something over the shoulder.
I tend to use the Peak Design Everyday backpack. I have both sizes though use the smaller 20l one mostly at the moment. They can be slung off of one shoulder for access on either side but are more designed as a backpack than a side sling. I would recommend Peak Design bags purely on their lifetime warranty which I can personally vouch for. I have had some very good reports from a friend and well-respected tuber - Rob Trek - on a KF sling. geni.us/kfsling - note this is an affiliate link. Peak design have incredibly good slings too.
@@AndyBanner appreciate the quick reply! 3min and 45 seconds in to the video there is a shot of you taking your camera out of a bag but it’s not your backpack.
@@1010AllOne The Peak Design backpack is pretty good, but it doesn’t hold lenses securely enough for my liking. They tend to roll around a bit with their fold-up flap system. For transporting large amounts of gear on big jobs, ThinkTank are pretty good. But for everyday walking around, I don’t think you can beat a Billingham shoulder bag like a Hadley Pro.
A good way to experiment with settings, and composition may be to use a manual lens {via adapter} on a digital camera. The histogram gives good feedback, peaking helps focusing, and the instant image view tells the whole story. If you start to get good {to your own mind} images the reward is instant and the knowledge will be retained.
I went out yesterday with my old X-E1 and an adapted m42 Fujinon 35mm f/2.8. Sometimes, even seasoned photograpers need a re-grounding and it was extremely therapeutic. Focusing manually, choosing an appropriate aperture for the subject, I had a great time 😊. A useful tip when focusing manually is to do so as accurately as possible wide open. Once stopped down to the final aperture of choice, the chances of a sharp image with a vintage optic are even more likely.
Sometimes, you may find that focus peaking is linked to a lens and that old optics may not allow the camera to operate that feature. That's when camera skills really need to be learned. Often, changing your gear can have a significant impact on your work. Initially it's probably a negative impact, but the new skills you gain from it are invaluable.
Also, I have found focus peaking on my manual lenses to be slightly off when I have thin fields of focus, so I end up having to take three times the photos to ensure I get a sharp one. It still helps more than hurts, because it gives you a good starting point, but always check your photos to ensure you got the focus you wanted and don't be afraid to adjust around what the camera is claiming is the best focus.
Love this video. New or old photographers should just go out and shoot a few frames. The more pictures you take the sooner you'll find your "look" or "style." Find what works for you. I still shoot with a 18MP camera. The latest & greatest gear won't make me a better photographer. Cheers
Good light and conditions are always going to beat location. Most of my favourite images were made within 50 miles and I don't live in an area that is particularly "photogenic".
Someone once commented on this channel ' I bet he could take a great photo inside a box' so I made a video of me doing just that... I didn't have to leave the house.
I sort of agree, we often overlook what is on our doorstep so to speak. I think it depends on what you want to capture. For me finding the right location is key and means travelling to get it. I love Padley Gorge with the brook, Bolehill Wood and Bolehill Plantation and the rock formations on Owler Tor, they give me something I cannot get in Forge Valley or Raincliffe Wood. The same goes for Keld the variation in views, landscape and wildflowers is something I cannot get on the east coast. The same for Spurn Point gives me images I cannot get in Bamburgh, Northumberland. So saying location is not important I disagree. For me location is equally important.
Unless you are into landscape photography, then terrible light and conditions is fantastic, fog, mist, seafret , ice bingo I got an amazing frozen lake scene. Everyone else, crap out stay inside useless day for photography
Very good video. It is easy to get sucked into the TH-camr product- pushing videos, when the more important thing to do is just simply go out and shoot
The best example of stupid things was someone who compared a crop camera and a full frame by cropping the full frame image on post as then saying that there is no diffrerence.
Yep, on the face of it, that sounds perfectly logical but of course its uneducated BS. The issue is that we can convince ourselves that because it seems to make sense then it must be fact. Too few people are prepared to question their decision and beliefs and, partly, that's why the planet is sleepwalking in another nightmare time. Maybe a bit heavy for a photo video, but if people aren't prepared to learn, hear different opinions, views, facts and such we get people with the merest sliver of knowledge spouting stuff that's simply untrue. The best thing to do is to keep as open a mind as possible and be prepared to question yourself. I know how difficult that is, for sure.
The pictures are mint because of the photographer. Sure, the right exposure helps, but if you point it at the wrong thing or even the right thing in the wrong way, the perfect exposure won't produce a great picture.
you need a fast shutter? to catch action then use manual!! you can open up the aperture in case your losing light ! auto iso ! this bloke is right just learn what everything is more light less light etc ! the real talent is framing a shot in the view finder and catching the light .
Surely, photography and resulting photos, at a hobbyist level in particular, is very subjective? What represents a good image to someone, will not please someone else. Taking pictures should provide pleasure to the person behind the lens. Whether anyone else likes the results doesn’t really matter. When I left school, I spent a couple of years working as an assistant photographer at a studio in the West End of London, using 5x4 and half plate cameras. It seriously affected my hobby, as I became far too conscious of trying to take the perfect picture outside of work. Like other art forms, beauty is in the eye of the beholder - that’s why someone paid $6.2 million dollars for a banana stuck to a wall with duct tape recently.
What's even worse is when they're gifted a 10 grand Hasselblad and going out saying how amazing it is!! when in reality our measly few hundred quit kits will get images just as good......
This is an issue that I have thought about recently. Not least because I imagine my channel will leap in size to the level where Hassleblad or Leica will be in touch soon, but I do wonder how I would react. Clearly, shock with a great degree of bewilderment, but would I accept? I think to suggest that a 10 grand camera will be as good as a 500 camera is off the mark, but could I justify wandering around the woods with such a thing and what would people think of me? I turn down lots of things that I would find genuinely useful but cannot justify in terms of value to the channel audience, but if OM System were to say, 'Here, have this new OM1mk2 on long term loan', could I justify accepting that, given that I shoot with a year old body and have plans to replace it with the same model or the mk3 as a used item when it gives up the ghost which is potentially quite soon. I certainly don't criticise the likes of Tom Heaton for accepting. If nothing else, it's one heck of a validation on one's work and I also remember him talking about this. The danger for all youtubers who get real success is that with it comes certain benefits that are not available to others. Whether it's wonderful locations to travel to, amazing gear gifts or valuable sponsorships, there's a risk of becoming unrelatable. There's also a risk of conceitedness which I feel could be levelled at least one person who's been gifted a whole camera system in the last year and earlier chose to tell me that I was wrong over my ISO comment without telling me how my view on ISO was wrong. He has since removed the comment, I expect because he learned something I would have expected him to have already known before telling me that I was wrong and that I made a 'silly comment'. This very well respected tuber instantly lost my respect for them. Not that that will worry them, of course.
You are absolutely correct … put the camera on a tripod take a few images at different focal lengths you’ll get the same perspective but move the camera/tripod and you’ll get different perspectives.
Plenty of great advice here, so thanks Andrew. I have always thought that anyone who says, 'Zoom with your feet' does not understand how their camera functions, and I am sure that little section on the leaf will help lots of your viewers. Incidentally, I like your aviator jacket - very smart.
Zooming giwyh feet, even arms can help if one simply doesn't have the reach, but that's only to get a bit more reach on a flat surface where one can walk, but that's just basic knowledge, and common sense, but you are right you can't always do that, like in small area, also if shooting up at something you can't walk closer, as that changes the angle.
Well done, Andrew. What works, works. People are just trying to get clicks. Seems a bit desperate to me. I set everything to "Imagination Priority" and let 'er rip (insert chainsaw sound effects). Been working just fine for 40 years.
Broooooom, Broooom, Peter. One thing I will say is that it's interesting to be trolled by Gary Gough - who has over 100k subs - over how wrong I am about my view that ISO isn't necessarily part of exposure. It's so easy to lose respect for people I find. See you tomorrow?
For sure, many cameras are better at certain things than others, just as ships are better bulk carriers than trucks. What I seriously doubt though is whether anybody could tell the difference - or care - about which camera your images were taken with. You will, but I would suggest the reason you won't go back is more the handling and features rather than a negligible - and likely almost invisible - increase in image quality.
@@AndyBannerYou can convert technological gains in image quality to QOL improvements. We reached a point where landscape photographers often can skip bracketing shots, that’s convenient, even though it means the IQ gains are voided.
That's getting rather deep. Yes, some tech gains improve quality of life. But we're talking about, what is for most people, a hobby so your point about IQ gains - really skill rather than IQ - is pertinent. But if you extrapolate this further, with the power of generative AI, why bother at all with a camera of all you want is perfection without the engagement, the process and effort. Why buy a pile of clay, a wheel, kiln and all the other stuff when you can walk into a supermarket and buy a mug?
@ If photography is about capturing a moment, I see nothing wrong with cameras eventually achieving the same capabilities as our own eyes in terms of dynamic range. So anything not going beyond what our eyes can do, I’d consider “natural”. And if enjoyed as art as opposed to documentary work, anything is possible I suppose. I am convinced that natural (and sometimes artificial) limitations make things more fun. A good analogy would be the world of diverse beverages and drinks: be it tea, coffee, wine - It would not be fun exploring all the different flavors if we just put the flavor that we seek right into them. I like orange notes in my coffee so why not pour orange juice into it? Well, it’s not interesting.
Those channels just exploit our human trait of mimicking others in the hope of improving ourselves, someone claims to be a pro so we think they must have higher skills. Generally it ends up that you just do what you like.I took some nice pics on my first brownie camera, all I could do was point and shoot, aperture and other settings weren’t available to me but it didn’t prevent getting great photos. I’m amused by these people claiming I must do such and such to improve my photos but the followers that hang on their every word are sad.
As long as the one taking photos is happy with them and not for making money then who cares, the enjoyment is taking the photos then seeing what works and playing with camera setting to see the results, it’s easy to delete delete delete once your not happy with and enjoy 🥳🥳🥳
If the end recipient of the image is happy, all good. Whether money exchanges is immaterial to the ultimate satisfaction, surely? As you say, the enjoyment is in the process. Just as your windsurfing - you do it for enjoyment.
@@AndyBanner Thank you for your reply, I use my smartphone and camera for photos, both have there place, been out today shooting as had snow in the Uk and nice to have different snow photos. Yes love my windsurfing and do it for the pure enjoyment and is 100% own pleasure and have to keep practicing to improve just like photography 🤩🤩🤩🥳🥳🥳 Edited to add, new subscriber 🥳🥳
Sadly, just grey and rain on the Norfolk Coast. I saw suggestion of a dusting in Kings Lynn but nothing worth driving out for. We don't get it much in these parts. Thanks for subscribing. Welcome on board.
Photography has always been a subjective interest and hobby. What someone says is a wonderful shot can also be felt as crap by the other. I think the best is to just go with what you feel is the best. All opinions and "advice" are just considered as tips and suggestions for you to try, you as the user will be the one to determine for yourself if you want to follow or not. In photography all advices and suggestions are not considered as "the absolute 100% truth". Photography skills are honed by real life trial and error and not by "advices".
I would agree to an extent. But the experiences of others are also the key to learning. As a clear example, the obvious thought pattern from looking at the iris of a lens opening and closing is that it makes the picture larger or smaller not brighter or darker. Experimentation quicky debunks this, but then a great deal more experimentation needs to take place to work out what it actually does do. Much quicker to take advice and knowlegde from someone who already knows. I guess my point is that learning anything has to be a mix of exchanged knowledge and advice rather than starting at the bottom and finding your way like those that first worked things out.
100% agree … there are some ‘influencers’ who have made themselves ‘rock star’ snappers, talk almost condescendingly and patronisingly into their camera, yet their work and results, whilst sometimes not too shabby, are usually non imaginative, non original, and barely above average. If you dare to talk about the creative genius of the likes of Mayer, McCullin, Killip, Lange, Suzuki, etc who invariably created such inspirational images with the the same single body and prime, they get all hurt and defensive … and take honest critique as a personal attack 😊 📷
I often find critique to be difficult to take and understand how people who have, perhaps unfounded personal belief, would find offense in such. But that's each and every one of us as individuals. I appreciate that I am not a great photographer - competent in some areas, shocking in others. I don't pretend to be anything I am not. I know I have taken some great images - at least to me - but art is subjective. You need to keep a sense of reality and a degree of humility.
@ Sorry I didn’t mean personal critique of their work, I’m not in a position to do that, I meant some of their ‘high brow’ content or professed expertise, especially when promoting gear, techniques or ‘the only way’ to do something. I had one ‘street expert’ who had over 1/2 m subscribers get tetchy when I mentioned Vivian Meyer. He said that she wasn’t necessarily a good street photographer, she just got lucky! … I wish I could be that lucky 😂
I have an inkling I could name the photographer you're talking about.... Yes, Vivian Meyer got lucky suspiciously often... I guess I was including critique of their comments as well as work. The biggest problem people face is that when they know a little, they aren't sufficiently informed to know what they don't know and so they feel they know a lot. An experienced operator knows what they know and appreciates where there are gaps in their knowledge. The difficulty for many is that unless you're a real experienced person yourself, knowing that someone's advice is wrong can be difficult. This is why we have so many armchair experts on every conceivable subject on social media. One of the worst thoughts a human ever had is 'just how hard can it be?' and then feel their abject failure is actually a overwhelming success.
Yes. That's the best policy in most cases. There's another problem to in that people, naming no names, disagree with you with phrases like 'Wrong on so many accounts' and then just leave it at that. Err. Care to expand? I am here to learn and if you can show that I am wrong on so many accounts, I can improve. If you just lob in a grenade and retreat, your input is totally worthless and respect for your comments is reduced. Like any good exam - show your workings out...
I like that I don’t earn from photography. I don’t have to take photos. Maybe I am not the best photographer in the world, but it doesn’t matter. I enjoy the gear I have and I like the images I make . I learn what I can and that’s that.
As a pro of 52 years experience I do laugh at “experts” who look like teenagers giving advice. There are SOME brilliant young photographers. This video is excellent. The difference between pro and amateur is how much they get paid
@ A 2nd hand LUMIX G9 or Olympus EM1 Mk 2 or 3. Often found in excellent condition with little use. Lens? 12-40mm f4 Olympus or equivalent LUMIX. I’m starting to prefer the LUMIX because of the LCD screen on top. It allows you to see the most important camera settings without flipping out the screen and bringing up menus
Weird for me cause im just figuring my own style and knowledge out as I go and mess about more, eventually i'll get to A good place in the wold of cameras and computers, PC World if you will
If you think photography YT videos are full of false advice, try following those videos projecting political views or world events. 🙄 For the most part, I like the advice I hear from this channel. I do not need to watch videos on ' how to use aperture mode', how to see others with a new way of seeing subjects or compositions is far more usefull. My pet dislike is the " Five tips the Pro's never tell you about ? " .Maybe I've watched too many videos 😄
I am with you on the "5 tips / pros" videos. They get my goat. There's a reason though that these are so prolific - people click on them. If I was making that kind of stuff, I might have hit 30k subs by now. Mind you, this video debunking some of it has been my fastest growing one ever - much to my surprise.
IMHO the main difference between an amateur and a pro is just that a pro works as a photographer in order to make a living, nothing more. Hence, he may even deliver lower quality as it can be good enough. A pro may vallue his time more as time is money for someone making a living. This may result in the advice that a Nikon D5 is a better camera as camera x. Because of the properties that save time using the D5 (like iso performenace, lower amount of MB's) etc. etc.
Sadly there is too much unnecessary and repetitive content out there on TH-cam, in part caused by TH-camrs creating for creating sake as they need keep their ranking to get the views to get the money. In terms of Andrew criticising other photographer's content regarding the value of, or the preference of manual compared to aperture priority, there are times when aperture priority will not cut it, experience will be the teacher as many will find. Learning manual can help getting to know and understand the abilities and capabilities by mixing ISO, Aperture and Shutter speeds. Even with the computational power of cameras today, the three are so related to each other is it unbelievable. When on full auto, the camera will change the values of all three accordingly, to optimise the image for the lighting conditions. But then there are times when full auto or aperture priority will not give a fast enough shutter speed. Learning and understanding the triangle is important. Yes Andrew is correct in many situations in your chosen genre, if you compare aperture priority to manual there is very little detectable difference to the eye, when looking at an image on a computer screen or on most prints. The computational power of modern cameras make aperture priority and shutter priority quite often the go to settings. Even auto still has its place for some situations. It depends on what the user is able to produce themselves from the given settings, or what they prefer the camera to do for them, for what ever reason. If you prefer manual then stick with it, if you prefer aperture or shutter priorities then stick with them. Trial and error will help you find your way. Just as it will with composition, if you like the image, chances are others will and the composition was probably correct for that scene. In terms of megapixels there is a lot of sense in what Andrew says. My age old full frame Nikon D850 was 44 megapixels I think, whereas my current OM-1 (micro four thirds sensor) has 20 megapixels, and my TG-7 has 12 megapixels, they all produce excellent results on A4 prints which I am happy to display on my wall. I find that if you are printing up to A4 or even A3 then you do not need a high pixel resolution, but if you are printing above A3, or if you are cropping the image and then printing on A4 then the pixel count does matter. As your photography improves, and your composition improves, and as your collection of lenses increases, having the right tools and skills for the job means less cropping. Then high pixels are less of a significant factor, especially as the computational power of the camera gets better and better.
I have printed images at considerably larger than a3 from my em1 mk2. The point about reproduction size isn't entirely valid as the larger you make the display, the further back your viewing position. There are limits, for sure, but nobody walks up to a billboard that's 8m wide x 6m high and complains about the resolution. As with exposure. A, M, P or S all do the same job but in different ways. For long exposures, most cameras will be better in manual but I don't agree that manual is intrinsically better or even different from any priority mode because its all the same control from a different fixed position. As for unnecessary content. Hmm. I ran technical magazines for some years and there's only so many months that can pass before you have to revisit topics else you run out of things to say. This is not a new problem and it won't go away. Evergreen videos are great, but every so often you will have to repeat things that you have done in the past and that others have done and will do again. That is the nature of the beast.
@@AndyBanner It is true what you say about billboards, and it is true what you say about marketing to sell a camera, but sometimes higher resolution is needed. As many have said, it is not the megapixels that make a great image. For me my 20MP and my 12MP give me excellent images at A4 and occasionally at A3 for display in my home. At these sizes without any cropping there is no noticeable different to those taken at 44MP.
Surely, photography is about the final image. How you obtained that image via camera settings and what gear one used is almost irrelevant. I suspect that these days, most images are manipulated in a computer before being posted online which makes camera settings have even less relevance. Very few people actually care about one’s photos, viewing an image for half a second on an online picture forum before moving onto the next one; so having an “expert” saying you shouldn’t use f8 or 1/125s is rubbish.
I fundamentally disagree with your initial point. As a hobbyist, photography should be about the journey. It's about getting out there and enjoying the process. If you make it only about the image, you will quickly become disenchanted with the hobby because you'll be disappointed with the outcome 95% + of the time. Settings are irrelevant to anyone other than the photographer because they partly define what YOUR photo will look like. To anyone viewing the final result, the settings might serve as a learning experience to improve of obvious technical flaws, but as a teaching/learning aid, they are virtually pointless.
@@AndyBanner OK, I concede that I was a little harsh there. I still like to get up early, set my camera up and try and take some awesome pictures; however, I’m still disappointed with the outcome 95% of the time 🤣
Perhaps what you mean is correcting for mistakes in those settings? That's almost impossible generally. But going the other way and selectively blurring or sharpening anything within the image is, of course, much easier. Basically degradation is simpler than refinement in all forms of captured data.
Sure, they have their advantages. I am not suggesting otherwise. If you're printing, it's perhaps more important, but if it's just on a screen, far less so.
@ i guess I’ve always wanted a camera like the character Harrison Ford used in the original Blade Runner movie, the one he used to take a picture at the doorway of a suspects apartment. He was able to zoom into the drain in the bathtub and read a serial number from a cell of an artificial life form. I think camera manufacturers have been resting on their laurels for years regarding technology. According to Moore’s law the memory capacity and or processing capability of devices doubles every two years. To me this means the minimum megapixel count of an entry level camera should be over 100 megapixels and the typical one should be over a gigapixel. Nothing would excite the user base more than jumping forward with cameras by advancing memory, processing and sensor capabilities. In my previous flippant comment I said I cropped a lot. My usage case was aviation photography and I found that cropping in was kind of fun to see what was down there on the ground. Best wishes in the new year and your fine TH-cam channel.
Yes, I saw that video and it was ridiculous. If you have the exposure correct and the camera will do that for you or advise you, a photo shot in manual will be the same as a photo shot in AP. The only thing that might be different is the depth of field which depends on aperture. The comments were even more ridiculous. It is clear that some of the commentators didn't have a clue about the basics. They were saying that they preferred manual mode and then were fiddling with ISO and even exposure compensation. Use your shutter speed or aperture modes, that is what they are there for. Clearly, these people had never used a film camera and again didn't know the basics.
I have to say that I nearly spat my coffee out watching it. How any experienced photographer can produce such pointless dross is beyond me. I've just been back to read some of the comments too: yes, a smorgasbord of ridiculousness showing just how many people are sucked in by nonsense.
Actually more megapixels are objectively better. The question is will you personally benift from them and will it be by enough to base a purchasing decision on? More megapixes isn't just for printing big. When you have more data recorded than you need it is called over sampling. Over sampling has 2 major benifts in photography. First at the same output size, exposure and processing more megapixes mean less apparent noise in the image. Even to a point of beingable to use a higher iso than you normally would. Secondly if you have enough megapixes your 50mm lens can also be a 100mm or even 200mm lens through cropping in post. This can mean not having to cary or even own a short telephoto lens for many use cases. This is made even easier with cameras that have built in 1.5x crop modes. If your output size only requires 2mp, but your camera shoots 16, 24, or 50+mp you have a lot of flexibility in shooting and in post production. Having more data to work with in post helps keep the IQ high while applying significant post processing. So the question isn't whether more MP is better, it inarguably is. The question is how important is that difference vs other facrors when selecting a camera. For most other factors like cost or af performance will mater more than the benifts of say 24mp vs 50mp or 16mp va 24mp.
I haven't said that more pixels are better, only that they are often not necessary. There's also the point about photosite size. You have also fallen into the trap of suggesting that cropping is zooming - it is not. Cropping is cropping. But yes, I have no argument that more pixels gives greater flexibility and fundamentally agree that it's only useful if you can make use of them. The problem is that more pixels is the most common metric that people without the knowledge will use to mark one thing as better or worse than another and this is fundamentally wrong. It's the use case that determines the suitability.
We mostly agree. The issue imo with speaking in generalities instead of specifics. The internet loves over simplifications. Like "is x better than y" or "zoom with your feet" or "use x mode" ect. When instead a photographer should be thinking "what is x, how does it compare to what y is and which will benift me the most or produce the image I want." Unfortunately this is often a much more nuanced way to look at it then most people have patience or time for in a youtube video. You are right zooming isn't cropping in post. Changing the lens focal length instead of cropping in post gives you the same image as cropping, just with more mp. So the question is does that matter? Well only the individual photographer can decide that for themselves. My point is discussions of this nature need to talk more about why you would or wouldn't want xyz feature or to do xyz technique instead of making banket statments like "most photographers don't need x." Particularly when talking to beginners.
@ItsWillLee More mp results in less apparent noise at the same output size as long as the exposures are the same, the processing is the same and the noise performance of the sensors are similar. The more an image is downsamples from it's capture size, the less apparent noise is. You can try it yourself. Crank up the iso on your camera than make 4 or 5 images starting at 100% and halving the pixel size for each subsequent output. Watch as the noise becomes less and less apparent as the image gets smaller. If an image starts at say 50mp and one starts at say 16mp but are both resized to say 2mp, the 50 mp image has been downsampled much more and will have less apparent noise than the 16mp one. Given same or very close exposures, similar processing, similar sensors tech ect of course.
Rarely do people review gear on TH-cam. They hold it up and read off a spec sheet. That's about as close to a review as a doctor doing a telephone consultation.
People should probably take structured photography lessons first, and maybe start off with an intermediate camera, even if they can afford to spend $3000 to $5000. What you like to shoot can determine what you spend that money on, which can vary greatly.
As with any video that suddenly breaks previous channel viewer numbers, this one has attracted a few people who disagree with some of my points. Most have valid comments, often around the fact that a higher resolution image allows for more cropping. Of course, this is true, but there's so many variables to consider. Firstly, remember that most photographs will never be printed and so will be most likely viewed on a 2.1mp display - that being the common standard of 1080p. From a 20mp image, that's a lot of potential cropping. The example of bird photography is a common point raised and to this I would say that specialist subjects generally benefit from specialist and expensive gear and, clearly, I am not aiming my video at someone who's a newbie in a specialist genre - frankly anybody looking to get into such things probably needs to be watching the content of people like Simon D'entremont who makes a living from wildlife.
Where people have valid comments for or against my content here, I welcome their input. I am far from the most knowledgeable person in this field and I wish to fill gaps in my knowledge and reasoning. But anyone that wishes to argue by giving weak ifs and buts, is on a fast track to being ignored. Yes, I know that someone with zero knowledge of exposure is likely to get a better exposed image with one of the program control modes rather than manual - what is precisely your point? My point was that all the exposure modes control the same things, but they do them in different ways whilst all generally giving you the option of ultimate control via EV compensation and that some modes are more suited to different scenarios that others. How can anyone argue with these fundamentally factual statements?
Oh, and yes, I had a skirt/long tunic on over trousers. Get over it.
Besides S.d'E, a person among the few (in UK in particular) to watch is Sean Tucker (no bs, a very decent person, but definitely Not bcs he is an ex-priest)
Sean is a good guy for sure. Lovey chap to talk to also.
@@AndyBanner I'd put it this way. There is so much dubious advice out there (or even if it is undubious still might not work for everyone) that one should just get out there and snap one's photos, one can extensively experiment since it doesn't cost one $1-$1.50 every time one clicks that shutter button as it does with film. One will learn and develop one's own style that one, in the end it is more efficient than attempting to wade through all the advice.
I read a book on oil painting, and one bit of advice the guy who wrote that book gave was to limit oneself to a specific time per painting, short enough that it was a challenge to finish in that time, strictly stick to that time, quit, put the painting in a closet and don't look again at any of the paintings until one has done one painting per day for 90 days, don't worry about quality, just put paint to canvas. When one finishes those 90 days then line them up in order, one will see improvement in one's skill over those 90 days and the real bonus is that one's personal style will have developed in an organic way just by not worrying about how it looks or the results.
One photographer I watch on TH-cam is really frustrating because he blindly applies presets to his photos. Often his photos look better before the presets are applied, but he is so addicted to using those presets that he doesn't really slow down to consider, a shame because he actually is a talented photographer, but just doesn't stop to consider sometimes.
I'll say it once, you said quite big words (specially when you are like someone who has dyspnea) from such an amateur level video.
I don't understand your comment @albert. It can be taken in different ways.
As someone who is just starting to dip his toe into photography, and having spent many hours looking at videos about what is the best camera, what lenses (minefield) and how to take good pictures. This video was a breath of fresh air. Many thanks.
Simple advice: buy used from a reputable company with a warranty. Even an older DSLR will get you great image quality so long as you have decent lenses. don't over spend and invest in your skills more than the gear - book a workshop or training. Get out and practice. Use your phone - it's remarkably capable. Oh, and of course, subscribe to my channel...
@@AndyBanner that is good advice .
Or even pick a good film camera.
35 mm film takes great pictures.
I wouldn't recommend a film camera unless you have deep pockets. Photography was never a cheap hobby, but what you'll save in gear will be very quickly spent on film and processing. It's a great way to learn as you become more focused on the task because of the cost, but learning will be slow because of processing time. Get a semi-modern digital camera and work methodically.
The best camera is the one you have with you.
Watching this was refreshing. Fifty years ago, when I was 15 years old, I probably took better photographs with a basic 35 mm rangefinder camera than I have taken since because I was concerned about the composition of the image. I understood the camera settings because they fascinated me and being a curious boy I had read up on them and experimented. Remember that changing the ISO setting on a film camera means changing the film so not an option while out and about. I left school at 16 and my interest, and my pictures, led to me becoming a photographer's assistant in Maurice Rickards' (look him up) small and creative photographic and graphic London studio. I then became the photographer at the studio. Maurice sold the business to concentrate on his writing. I was no good at winning new clients however and the design business also declined so after 8 years I was out of a job.
What's the point of this ramble? Being a professional photographer involves much more than taking photographs, it involves marketing, making and keeping contacts and meeting the client's requirements or if you take photographs on spec marketing those photographs in a crowded market. Being an amateur means enjoying what you do and having no-one to please but yourself.
To complete my personal story I moved into IT and had a successful career.
Have you tried turning it off and on again ?
Thanks for sharing that. Parts of your story really hit a familiar spot for me as well.
I hear breathlessness in the delivery, and whenever I hear that I have to say get the heart checked. Excellent points concerning common pitfalls in understanding photography.
Thanks for the concern. I am a mostly unfit past-middle-aged human lacking in motivation. I am a over weight and seriously depressed. Most days, I don't much care if I wake up again.
Comments like yours really help me realise that it probably is worth sticking around. Thank you.
@@AndyBanner Well then, you are a survivor. We are a tattered and broken bunch aren't we! Thank God for light and photography!
Keep going Andy your work is appreciated.
Great video! I've watched you for two years now I think. Great advice! When I first got my camera I was sitting on the patio faffing with the settings to learn, just shooting random stuff that caught my eye. Our lawn was over grown and I liked the way the sun was hitting some tall grass and took a photo. It came out really well! When my daughter saw it, she was jealous of it LOL. She has more experience than I do and was so mad I took it just messing around. Thank you for the good advice
Being observant is a significant proportion of the art.
"Why your photographs are bad" type videos really irritate me.
Indeed.
Loved the video. So much good advice. I’ve dabbled in photography for years. Two years ago I got more serious. I watched thousands of hours of how to, which camera, which lens etc. I’ve learned lots but come to the conclusion only I can make myself a better photographer. And it’s a long process. I’m constantly told I need this camera/lens, and I don’t. Any half decent camera is way better than I need. I’ve learned that as someone who wants to take landscape photographs there’s no point listening to what is the perfect camera from a street, portrait photographer or videographer.
Another great video Andy. Marketing does seem to drive the assumption that more pixels must be better. I know it’s a little off topic, but, as an amateur astronomer I’m often asked about cameras for taking pictures of the night sky - quite commonly “should I buy camera x because it has more megapixels”. Bigger pixels (so normally fewer megapixels for a given sensor size) can really help improve the signal to noise ratio, important when taking photos of such faint targets. There are other things to consider of course, but your point on pixel count rings true here as well.
Thanks❤if I were to get on the internet id be saying what you illustrate so well.
Thank you so much. Your support is so welcome.
I started my photography journey about 4 year's ago, and I fell into the trap of watching loads of TH-cam videos giving advice, some good some bad, but I found from watching one video to another video, you get bombarded with so much contradictory advice, that's my experience anyway.
The problem is that as an inexperienced person in any field, it can be difficult to know what advice is good or bad.
Strangely, the best and unbiased advice is often in the thick camera manual that too few people read.
Great points. After doing photography 60 years it is interesting to see people convinced that their SLR camera is outdated and jump onto the latest mirrorless camera expenses.
Not complaining because the Canon 5DMkIV can be bought used and are more than adequate so I bought 2 bodies used at a good price.
A Canon tech guy confirmed this and his point that after 4 generations this camera is as good as it gets and that the new designs are starting all over in the refinement cycles.
Yes, indeed. The 5d Mk 4 is a real workhorse loved by professional photographers the world over. The fact is that there's been very few significant image quality enhancements over the last few years and, actually, when you think about it, just how much better can it get? There's no point in generating a reproduction that the human eye cannot perceive. Advancements are more likely in computational capabilities in future and we've probably reach peak image quality and the fight will become over resolution which, again, very few people actually need. Colour bit depth is the other improvement possible and that's more where we can improve dynamic range which is already superior to most film anyway.
Is there a size/weight advantage between a DSLR and a Mirrorless - often yes, but often also outweighed by the cost differences. The biggest advantage for me is that a mirrorless is built for permeant live view which is a tool I find most useful.
@@AndyBanner I use Live View most often because it translates the image into a 2D space with a frame to better preview of the final image composition. That was one aspect of working with large format that has stayed with me.
The few image enhancements for my system, if needed can be gained with DxO Pure Raw.
I agree the PhotoLab program is a great way to go (I bought it) but I need the TK plugins with Photoshop for even more control.
Diminishing returns have arrived in the hardware but the software is extending the capabilities.
The biggest NEED now is . . . time in the field, both literally and figuratively.
This is the first time I see a video from your channel and I cannot agree more with all what you've said and how you approach to your photography is. I've started with photography almost 4 years ago and as you've said it was easier to check on videos than reading my camera manual... so I've fallen on all those bad and contradictory advices you can find on TH-cam. What I hate the most is the new trend "pro and newbie / amateur" stuff... or the "use these settings to get good pictures"... and of course "this is my new favourite/best/sharpest lens"... video sponsored by... the manufacturer :o)
I thank you for the 28 minutes of fresh air. Good new year for you an all the viewers.
When I got my first camera, Pentax K-r I did not know anything. What helped me best was trying different priority modes by myself and just shoot anything. To experience what every priority modes does, to experience differences between them with realtime examples. And then I had my own experience which I could use to decide which mode is best for me. I use mostly Manual, because I like that mode, but I dont see any problem to use other priority mode, if you think that in your situation it would be better. I see lot of these videos you are mentioning and 95% of them are talking on loop about same stuff. They talks about stuff what could be explained in 1 minute around 10 minutes and I often consider them as clickbaits for new photographers. I mean if you need some baseline information and you are lazy to learn it by trying or reading manual, its good starting point, but photography is art. You are artist and its entirely up to you, how you decide approach your art.
Precisely.
Ahhh the best settings question, my reply is when asked "the settings that get you the shot" mine won't work because that moment in time, light/conditions has gone
It's not just light and conditions, it's location, distance to subject, gear. It's literally every variable that combines to make a photograph. The problem with these question is not the questions themselves but anyone who answers them with definitive settings.
@AndyBanner yeah sorry I thought location was implied if someone is asking about settings of any particular image
Yes, but even location is subject to finding the same tripod holes - if you see what I mean.
@@AndyBanner although in saying that(my last reply ) I have had many people who followed me on twitter from the UK ask me what settings for the nightscapes i take, and that is more them expecting my settings to work over there and they just won't due to my very good bortle 1-2 sky
@@AndyBanner yes again that stuff is implied
I have never subscribed to the idea that s larger sensor is required to get good images and I certainly argued against the idea of “zooming with your feet.” In fact, it was a the 10x zoom of my first ever point and shoot that got me hooked!
Now I use aps-c cameras, but only because my point and shoot camera was not capable of focusing fast enough to capture my my children performing indoors and in low light.
Some good words spoken here, to add I would always say 'shot for yourself, unless your being paid to do a job' and always look behind you 'cos the light/image/comp maybe better.
My problem with a lot of photography youtube videos are they're far too beginner-focussed. Why are there so many videos that assume viewers are all 'beginners'? And why do so many think they need to add yet more to them?
Or even just too "instruction" focussed.
I don't want to be _taught_ photography, or told what to do, or not do, I just like to watch people doing it.
I think that if you follow people like Tom Heaton, Nigel Danson, Henry Turner, Simon Booth and Simon Baxter, you'll get exactly that. Oh, and me obviously.
I totally agree with you. Not only is a lot of what you read or hear from "TH-camrs" is a repeat of what someone has heard and not based on their own empirical testing and work. I have found that very few people actually do the work and base their comments on first-hand experience. I specialize in analog large and ultra large format photography, but your comments apply to any type of photography. Glad I found your channel.
A lot of what people say and believe is from comments rather than learned experiences and other education. Much of it also acts directly on existing biases which people don't want to be challenged on. We're all guilty of this to some extent and cognitive dissonance plays a big part too. I try to be mindful of this and wish to be as open-minded as possible because I absolutely understand that what I know and believe can be inaccurate or plain wrong on occasion. I generally try to make it clear when I am giving an opinion rather than stating facts. Of course, not everybody listens and will just cherry pick what triggers them into reaction or retention, ignoring the context and reframing things.
To err is human.
"Never use a tripod, I hate lugging these around" was the first bit of YT advice I was happy to dispense with, while I do often do my best to get the shot hand held... a tripod is hardly a heavy load these days and,... good lord... can it enable the right shots in tough conditions.
I do rely considerably on my ability to crop, so the d850, from Nikon, while aged for a modern camera, provides ample forgiving resolution to readjust and fix my shortcomings.
Nowt wrong with cropping. Elliot Erwitt famously cropped. The d850 is a beast of a camera - I would have liked to be able to justify one some years ago.
Great video Andy and sage advice.
I would disagree (to a point) with your definition of the difference between a pro and an amateur. Expertise might be a factor when looking at a new amateur photographer vs a pro, but in general I'd argue that the only real difference is that a pro gets paid to take pictures while an amateur does it mostly for the love of the image or process.
anyway, whatever - nice jacket 🙂
Yes, of course, the dictionary definition of a pro is someone who gets paid to carry out a service. Too many people feel that it's otherwise of course and use it as some kind of "I know what I am talking about" definition. I know there's plenty of "pro" photographers who are actually bloody awful. At best, some of them are mere shutter pressers working to prescriptive instructions. I would consider myself a pro inland boat pilot who's experienced tug boat operators with oodles more boat handling experience than I totally foul up manoeuvre after manoeuvre. Some lorry drivers are shockingly bad at driving. Like I say, be careful what BS you believe.
I don't wear that coat very often these days. It was purchased on my honeymoon a very long time ago as a coat for bombing about in my Morgan. As you can see, I still have the coat. Just about still have the wife. Sadly, the car is somebody else's now.
Be well, Nick
@@AndyBanner 2 out of 3 ain't bad Andy!!
Every self titled 'photographer ' on youtube is a professional guru in their opinion. Andrew, I agree 100%. Lots of tossers on the web claiming to be the know it alls!
Truth. Ive been shooting professionally for nearly 40 years and I do not consider myself an "expert." The more I know, the more I know what I don't know. Any expert opinion is just that, an opinion. If ypu don't learn something new every day, you're not progressing.
@@dangilmore9724 So true - and yet some of what I learn many days are little trips and tricks I pick up from these”gurus” on TH-cam. To stop looking at their videos because some of them are full of themselves is a bit of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
That depends on just how much tosh you can suffer. If you have to sit through hours of garbage in hope of a nugget, you probably have too much time on your hands.
@ I don’t agree. There are many bs photo videos but you can quickly identify them and ignore them in future. But there are some excellent presenters from whom you can learn. Even if it’s only a tip or two, it’s still good to hear their approach and admire their beautiful images. You can’t tar the whole community with one brush.
I am not trying to. The biggest culprits tend to be those making their way up the greasy YT pole. Those at the top are there because they are good at what they do and aren't pretending to be anything they are not.
"More megapixels doesn't make better photos" may be true if you are shooting landscapes or portraits. But, if you are shooting wildlife (particularly birds) and have to crop your photos, more megapixels can absolutely be helpful.
Yes, there are a few situations where more resolution is better or where you're compensating for having a shorter focal length. Specialist situations require more specialist tools.
To some extent I do agree. For me if shooting wildlife it is getting the right shutter and settings then I can get some amazing results with my 20 megapixels at A4 printing.
The ability to crop into images is a useful feature. People like Elliott Erwitt and Arnold Newman shot medium and large format for precisely this reason. The 60MP on the Leica Q3 enables multiple fields of view without needing to change lenses. It's really useful. You could argue it's a gimmick, but I use it for professional work all the time.
Indeed. I actually interviewed Elliot Erwitt once: long time ago. Knowing how to properly make the most out of a tool is the key to its benefits. For most people, Black and Decker is sufficient, for someone that needs the power and precision and can make the most of it they'll go for Festool.
@@ihateunicorns867 In Sept 1993 I ran into a younger Erwitt (a son?) working for the Daily News in the last Wigstock held in the East Village. I used OC flash (by cable to the detachable sensor in the hotshoe; deep shades under the summer trees) & a 16mm fisheye (portrait orientation, no AF) to shoot the costumed trans. 12x16 c-prints (from cut paper) were hand made the next day in a friend's lab. By mid Dec (having missed a 15-hr flight 6 days earlier; printing for my late friend, a forensic pathologist), I called it my last day in a darkroom. By 2010 it was all digital ; there's no return although I'm still keeping some film cameras & lenses. Having grown up on Agfachromes (more "affordable" for a kid) I DoNot RAW !! {Time is better spent shooting & on math.}
As a new amateur photographer, i have done 75% of my photography on the job driving a truck locally picking up milk at dairy farms. It amazes me how many great shots ive gotten!
I have been using Aperture priority for the 16 years that I have been involved in digital photography. For me Aperture is the very first thing I set depending upon the subject and the amount of Depth of field is need, next i set ISO depending upon the amount of light and subject, if it is a landscape photography is take into consideration will i be using a tripod or hand held and do i need every thing sharp or some motion shown. If it's wildlife i use a 100-400mm Fujifilm lens and I use a higher ISO. Lastly I use exposure compensation to make adjustments to exposure, shooting in this way I have been able to photograph a variety of subjects including events.
Obviously, we should all use our gear in a way that we're happy with. There's always more than one way to achieve an outcome and some ways are more optimised for different scenarios than others. Personally, if I need to consider the shutter speed more than depth of field, the camera is switched to Shutter Priority every time - it's what it's for. But the same result can be achieved using Aperture priority. It just might take more dial movement. It's much the same as someone using the menu system to cut and paste text rather than control x and control p. We tend to stick with what we are used to because change can be difficult to effect.
ISO is only ever a consideration for me if I can't capture the image properly using the actual creative exposure settings of aperture and shutter. ISO is the only one of these settings that isn't a creative choice (working on the reasonable premise that you want the best quality image capture).
This was priceless advice, for you're quite right: It's been an issue ever since the beginning of time, really... People accepting "advice" at face-value as "facts/rules". Seems we also encourage this lack of thinking for ourselves in society in this day and age. I've been shooting Olympus ever since the film days and I love my E-M1X, heavy "brick" though it may be, especially when I'm packing gear in and out of the badlands of western North Dakota. I've had more than a few scoff at my gear but that's just fine (my dad was the real pro and shooting models all of my adult life with Oly gear). I am aware of the limitations of my gear and did a lot of research before choosing to buy this setup a couple of years ago. I have always been one to experiment and the learning never really ends. Is all my gear necessary for new photographers or even for myself? Not at all... Much of it only simplifies my capture of compositions. It simply means I have more time to "see" compositions instead of just "snapshots" (I use my cameraphone for snapshots lol). The ability to "see" is far more important than how many programable function buttons one has...
I always tell anyone new to photography to learn how to "see" the world around them. I shoot MOSTLY places that are not cliche shots, just to be away from those crowds and so I can shoot something that is off the beaten path that is different from everyone else (hopefully lol). Making a challenge with one's self to shoot something every day or every week, just to keep that practice in place, is often a great technique (sometimes I have to remind even myself when I begin feeling a creative rut settling in).
Forgive my rambling! I enjoyed hearing this commentary today... Very refreshing, indeed. Too bad I didn't wait another year or so to buy my body, for now I can find them at half the price on the used sites and though they were introduced about 2019, they still hold their own quite well. Happy New Year and thanks for sharing these thoughts!
Hey, John, ramble away. I love reading people's comments.
Good advice Andrew .I agree you can get good photos locally you just have to go and look for them I get most of mine mainly street photography in about 5 miles from were I live in a small town . Enjoy your videos a lot . Have a good new year
Thank you. You too.
if you add the domain extension of 'the netherlands' to the word 'knipser' you get my subjects, most of which are located in an area with a radius of 15 km. The light changes, the seasons change. You don't need to go abroad.
Great video mate. Was pointed to it during the livestream on The 617 Club tonight.
Have subscribed and look forward to future videos.
Thank you. It was a surprise to hear Tom's shoutout as I had no expectation of him watching it!
Hope you find the other videos valuable. There's a lot to catch up on! ;-)
@ it is not often I go back on a channel but just pick future one I like to look of. You would see from my channel that I am into landscape photography and getting into the fells in the Lake District so tend to watch related videos or ones that cover photography in general like your latest.
I just watched a video by a popular Fuji youtube reviewer saying to focus better with the Voigtlander 23 f1.2 that you should focus wide open...then stop down. Reason being that the focus peaking with Voigtlander X mount lenses was different than the native Fuji lenses. He failed to mention that the CV 23 f1.2 has severe field curvature, even though he himself did a video about it with that lens. So his entire video about focusing better with it was completely wrong
Thank you Andrew. Wishing you a good year.
Thank you. You too.
For me, the diffence in stopping and getting a decent image of a scene I may have passed by many times is simply that of inspiration. That inspiration can come in many forms. Changing seasons, the quality of light, time of day - a myriad of things. But many times, it's simply a state of mind. If I'm going through a creative "dry" period it can often help to choose a theme or give yourself a little project. Perhaps, decide to deliberately confine yourself to black and white? Or maybe choose a specific colour theme instead. BUT, don't be too rigid with this. If the project of the day enhances your inspiration, it can often lead to a great image when you break the self-imposed rule of the day 😊
While not a novice i loved this video and the presentation, I wish id come across something like this when i was starting out.
Based on my (informal) tests, it doesn't seem wise to go below 16MP when the final product is a DIN A4 or US letter print of a picture with fine detail. My inkling is that this format may actually be one of the most demanding, as with smaller sizes, lower camera resolution is rather obviously sufficient, whereas with larger sizes, one is bound to look at them from further afar and not notice IQ issues at the micro level unless it is an extremely detailed picture, e.g. a very busy and layered wide-angle shot which invites close inspection. With A4, however, lack of resolving power in fine detail is easily apparent when viewed at a reasonable distance (up to what I'd consider reading distance) and can make e.g. fine lines look worse than they do on a 1080p screen. The 10MP of one of my older cameras, the E-400, are very clearly not sufficient. Does this correspond to your experience?
In truth, I don't print many images, but from a purely mathematical standpoint, your about right I think. Of the millions of images captured every day, probably less than 1% are likely to be printed as opposed to about my guess of perhaps 90% of all negative film ever exposed.
Myself and another photographer was hired to take wedding photos. He had a Sony 7R V, I had the original Canon 6D. 90% of the photos the Bride shared on social media and printed to have placed in her photo album were mine.
Too few people are prepared to admit that a camera is merely a tool and it's the operator that makes photos. That's a pretty stupid situation to admit to unwittingly of course. I really don't care what people capture images on. I will judge an image on what I see on a screen or on paper, not on the exif data.
I have been photographing nature in Norway for over 20 years. I really needed your reminder. Thanks!
Wonderful! Thanks for your support
Great video Andrew, we need more videos like this, that cut the BS and hyperbole. There is too much talk about gear on YT, not enough about the craft.
I agree fully.
It's always a pleasure to watch your enthusiasm and patience in teaching how simple photography can be if someone keeps the eyes open and have a look around. What I like especially is that you debunk the fairytale MFT is unusable for any good pictures that are not wildlife or macro - best regards from North-western Germany 🙂
Thank you.
It's interesting that you mention the great m4/3 "issue" as I don't believe I have ever really gotten into this debate on the channel. I just quietly plug away with a body that was released in 2016. Whilst it was somewhat groundbreaking then, that was nine years ago. However, the point is that very few people really need anything "better". There's a constant debate in certain circles about how M4/3 has had its day (and some argue it never did). You might as well be arguing that cars are better than motor cycles and that because there's more cars, m-cycles must be rubbish. A better analogy is perhaps that ships are better than trucks because they can carry more goods further distances and if all you ever measured ships vs trucks in was distance and volume you would come to that uneducated belief that ships were so much better than trucks... Often what these "debates" boil.down to is people's ability to think properly whilst being aware of their own biases and cognitive dissonance.
Very good teaching. I like your analytic thorough approach and of course the british dry humour.
My personal gripe is how they always suggest a suitable "entry level camera" as being one that is around £500-600 and if you check on the camera decision site these camera's are ranked in the top 200 of all digital camera's of all time.
Your field of view is what you make it.
Very good video, a few minutes from my house is a public park that i walk my dog 🐕 each morning, once the winter breaks, i bring my Fujifilm XH2 and a 100-400mm Fujifilm lens, last year I photographed a female wood duck with 6 of her little fur balls in the creek that flows along the outer perimeter of the park, in past years i have phographed a mother deer with her fawns and one occasion i photograph a mother deer nursing two fawns along the bank of the creek, it pays to have a camera ready to capture special moments in nature.
Thanks Andrew. Where is the info about your holiday lets, and how one registers an interest in a workshop? Be interested in both. Thanks. So many traps that I fall into it would be good to get some re-setting!! Cheers.
Thank you for a rare and honest video on photography. I will be watching your channel more often now
Awesome! Thank you!
I’m only n enthusiastic photographer and I love having 40mpx because sometimes when reviewing my photos on the larger computer screen I see compositions I missed when taking the photo and can extensively crop if required. Maybe I should slow right down when taking photos to consider more composition options at the time.
Yes. The biggest advantage of a high mp camera for most users is the ability to crop and still have a lot of pixels to work with. In other words, you have salvageability. It's rather debatable as to how much (if at all) this leeway improves your ability as a photographer as you allude.
One of my biggest bugbears is the "Straight out of camera" people... I'll be broaching that nugget sometime.
I think , understand how the exposure triangle relates to a camera then take loads and loads of photos, then print a lot , the good the bad and the wonderful, I found it really moved me on to handle and look at an image.
Printing certainly helps and if often overlooked these days. You need deep pockets though.
I mostly stopped watching "photography youtube", because rather than focusing on the art, youtubers are obsessed with gear - and keep trying to convince me that my m43 camera's sensor is somehow not good enough anymore. This is a nice change of pace.
Yeah, well I have rarely engaged with people who want to argue that m4/3 is in some way deficient. They are often the kind of person who would argue that Ford and a Bentley are fundamentally different modes of transport.
I rarely use a tripod but usually a monopod. This became a necessity for me when my right shoulder was frozen for a year.
I rarely use a tripod for stability. I use it because it's an essential tool for my work flow, especially in woodland where an image can make or break in the unsteady movement of the human body over a couple of inches. Tripods are much more than just stabilisers.
I always carry a tripod, I mainly use it for longer shutter that hand held won't do, or when getting some macro of fungi and flowers.
I have a big question here, I don't know nothing about photography really I've watched videos and I'm reading some books but I was wondering if it was possible to film in a decent resolution the spots where I believe there are good shots simply video it and then afterwards when I go through the video take still frames from that video. Is that allowed It's a silly question Is that allowed... The reason why I'm asking is because when I use my mobile I've got a Samsung galaxy s23 plus and when I do video I can take still frames from the video and I don't miss a trick and I seem to get many shots that I wouldn't be able to get if I was actually snapping. Does that make any sense? And could I do the same thing with my camera I recently purchased a camera and I can take still shots but as I was saying I don't want to miss a shot so is videoing allowed and then take still frames from that video? Let's say I was filming where you are and there was that fork in the path kind of like too pathways to the unknown and you're taking it from the single pathway looking at that fork in the path that would be a good shot but would it be a crime to video it and then take stills from it I don't know how many times I have said that or how to explain it exactly but I find that it's a pretty good way of getting some shots. I apologise I've only just woke up and it is 5:00 a.m. so my words probably aren't getting across properly ADHD doesn't help either lol
I get what you're saying and, at base level it sounds perfectly reasonable. Sadly, when you drill down into how video works, the viability of this begins to fall apart. There are many factors, but let's start with resolution: The highest common video resolution is 4K and in megapixel terms, just 8.3. Sounds high, but it's not really. Yes, I know your phone can do 8K too, but look at the size of the sensor. It's tiny. To avoid motion blur, you need to be very steady and have a lot of light and whilst this has little effect on video, every still is likely to have some blur from movement. Then there's the colour depth and the fact that the video frame compression is going to seriously degrade the image. Again, a lot of this is can be unnoticeable in the video, but much more so in the stills. And that compression seriously impacts the editability of the still also.
Basically, if you want to get a good photograph, take a photograph. If you want a good video, take a video. The two things appear to be much the same but their method of capture and storage are so different as to make each unsuitable for crossover. There will be lucky exceptions, obviously.
What camera should I get? I want to get into photography
Start with your smartphone.
Hmm, That's a bit like asking what are the Best Settings.
Use you phone and don't spend any money until you have a good understanding of what kind of photography floats your boat and then buy a low-cost used camera and lens that fits your kind of photography - crucially, visit a camera store and HOLD the cameras you're considering. If you buy a camera you don't like holding, you won't want to use it.
Don't worry about sensor size or mega pixels or how fancy a camera is. Learn about lighting and composition, if you do that you will begin to create great photos with what ever camera is in your hands.
Hello Andrew, thanks for the video, as a newbie I can already understand what you’re saying as I’ve watched many many hours of YT videos during the last 6 months of 2024. May I ask which camera bag you were using there (3:45 in the video) as I’m looking for one and after trying several now I’m still looking. I’m not looking for a rucksack type, but something over the shoulder.
I tend to use the Peak Design Everyday backpack. I have both sizes though use the smaller 20l one mostly at the moment. They can be slung off of one shoulder for access on either side but are more designed as a backpack than a side sling. I would recommend Peak Design bags purely on their lifetime warranty which I can personally vouch for.
I have had some very good reports from a friend and well-respected tuber - Rob Trek - on a KF sling. geni.us/kfsling - note this is an affiliate link.
Peak design have incredibly good slings too.
@@AndyBanner appreciate the quick reply! 3min and 45 seconds in to the video there is a shot of you taking your camera out of a bag but it’s not your backpack.
It is my backpack. I have no other camera bag. The PD everyday backpacks have dual full side access and top access. There's no front or rear zippers.
@@AndyBanner okay, thanks for clarifying.
@@1010AllOne The Peak Design backpack is pretty good, but it doesn’t hold lenses securely enough for my liking. They tend to roll around a bit with their fold-up flap system. For transporting large amounts of gear on big jobs, ThinkTank are pretty good. But for everyday walking around, I don’t think you can beat a Billingham shoulder bag like a Hadley Pro.
Very good..Thanks for sharing !!
Thanks for your support.
Great advice and timely commentary, an enjoyable video Andrew. 👍👏🏻
Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks, Colin.
A good way to experiment with settings, and composition may be to use a manual lens {via adapter} on a digital camera. The histogram gives good feedback, peaking helps focusing, and the instant image view tells the whole story. If you start to get good {to your own mind} images the reward is instant and the knowledge will be retained.
I went out yesterday with my old X-E1 and an adapted m42 Fujinon 35mm f/2.8. Sometimes, even seasoned photograpers need a re-grounding and it was extremely therapeutic. Focusing manually, choosing an appropriate aperture for the subject, I had a great time 😊. A useful tip when focusing manually is to do so as accurately as possible wide open. Once stopped down to the final aperture of choice, the chances of a sharp image with a vintage optic are even more likely.
Sometimes, you may find that focus peaking is linked to a lens and that old optics may not allow the camera to operate that feature. That's when camera skills really need to be learned.
Often, changing your gear can have a significant impact on your work. Initially it's probably a negative impact, but the new skills you gain from it are invaluable.
Also, I have found focus peaking on my manual lenses to be slightly off when I have thin fields of focus, so I end up having to take three times the photos to ensure I get a sharp one. It still helps more than hurts, because it gives you a good starting point, but always check your photos to ensure you got the focus you wanted and don't be afraid to adjust around what the camera is claiming is the best focus.
Love this video. New or old photographers should just go out and shoot a few frames. The more pictures you take the sooner you'll find your "look" or "style." Find what works for you. I still shoot with a 18MP camera. The latest & greatest gear won't make me a better photographer. Cheers
Indeed it won't. The best it will do is encourage you to go out more.
Enjoyed the video Andrew some very sound and good advice, I have stopped watching some channels for this very reason you discussed. Happy New Year
Thanks. Happy New Year to you too.
Good light and conditions are always going to beat location. Most of my favourite images were made within 50 miles and I don't live in an area that is particularly "photogenic".
Someone once commented on this channel ' I bet he could take a great photo inside a box' so I made a video of me doing just that... I didn't have to leave the house.
I sort of agree, we often overlook what is on our doorstep so to speak. I think it depends on what you want to capture.
For me finding the right location is key and means travelling to get it. I love Padley Gorge with the brook, Bolehill Wood and Bolehill Plantation and the rock formations on Owler Tor, they give me something I cannot get in Forge Valley or Raincliffe Wood. The same goes for Keld the variation in views, landscape and wildflowers is something I cannot get on the east coast. The same for Spurn Point gives me images I cannot get in Bamburgh, Northumberland. So saying location is not important I disagree. For me location is equally important.
Unless you are into landscape photography, then terrible light and conditions is fantastic, fog, mist, seafret , ice bingo I got an amazing frozen lake scene. Everyone else, crap out stay inside useless day for photography
Very good video. It is easy to get sucked into the TH-camr product- pushing videos, when the more important thing to do is just simply go out and shoot
Love your common sense , watching you I’m missing my sheepskin coat, it’s -25C today. Take care ,appreciate your channel.
I really didn't need that coat on during this trip. It looked very cold when I went out, but it wasn't in the end.
The best example of stupid things was someone who compared a crop camera and a full frame by cropping the full frame image on post as then saying that there is no diffrerence.
Yep, on the face of it, that sounds perfectly logical but of course its uneducated BS.
The issue is that we can convince ourselves that because it seems to make sense then it must be fact. Too few people are prepared to question their decision and beliefs and, partly, that's why the planet is sleepwalking in another nightmare time. Maybe a bit heavy for a photo video, but if people aren't prepared to learn, hear different opinions, views, facts and such we get people with the merest sliver of knowledge spouting stuff that's simply untrue. The best thing to do is to keep as open a mind as possible and be prepared to question yourself. I know how difficult that is, for sure.
Great work mate love your videos how you explain things well done to you I live in Shropshire by the way
Really enjoyed that Andrew, great advice thank you
Thanks for your ongoing support
I bought a new hasselblad 907 100c for my first camera. I stick it in auto and the pics are mint and people think I'm a natural photographer.
The pictures are mint because of the photographer. Sure, the right exposure helps, but if you point it at the wrong thing or even the right thing in the wrong way, the perfect exposure won't produce a great picture.
you need a fast shutter? to catch action then use manual!! you can open up the aperture in case your losing light ! auto iso ! this bloke is right just learn what everything is more light less light etc ! the real talent is framing a shot in the view finder and catching the light .
Exactly. I regularly say that you can learn the technicalities of photography from a book. That's the easy part.
Surely, photography and resulting photos, at a hobbyist level in particular, is very subjective? What represents a good image to someone, will not please someone else. Taking pictures should provide pleasure to the person behind the lens. Whether anyone else likes the results doesn’t really matter. When I left school, I spent a couple of years working as an assistant photographer at a studio in the West End of London, using 5x4 and half plate cameras. It seriously affected my hobby, as I became far too conscious of trying to take the perfect picture outside of work. Like other art forms, beauty is in the eye of the beholder - that’s why someone paid $6.2 million dollars for a banana stuck to a wall with duct tape recently.
What's even worse is when they're gifted a 10 grand Hasselblad and going out saying how amazing it is!! when in reality our measly few hundred quit kits will get images just as good......
This is an issue that I have thought about recently. Not least because I imagine my channel will leap in size to the level where Hassleblad or Leica will be in touch soon, but I do wonder how I would react. Clearly, shock with a great degree of bewilderment, but would I accept? I think to suggest that a 10 grand camera will be as good as a 500 camera is off the mark, but could I justify wandering around the woods with such a thing and what would people think of me? I turn down lots of things that I would find genuinely useful but cannot justify in terms of value to the channel audience, but if OM System were to say, 'Here, have this new OM1mk2 on long term loan', could I justify accepting that, given that I shoot with a year old body and have plans to replace it with the same model or the mk3 as a used item when it gives up the ghost which is potentially quite soon.
I certainly don't criticise the likes of Tom Heaton for accepting. If nothing else, it's one heck of a validation on one's work and I also remember him talking about this. The danger for all youtubers who get real success is that with it comes certain benefits that are not available to others. Whether it's wonderful locations to travel to, amazing gear gifts or valuable sponsorships, there's a risk of becoming unrelatable. There's also a risk of conceitedness which I feel could be levelled at least one person who's been gifted a whole camera system in the last year and earlier chose to tell me that I was wrong over my ISO comment without telling me how my view on ISO was wrong. He has since removed the comment, I expect because he learned something I would have expected him to have already known before telling me that I was wrong and that I made a 'silly comment'. This very well respected tuber instantly lost my respect for them. Not that that will worry them, of course.
Moving closer or further away most certainly does change perspective may I politely say.
Yes, but it's not the same as zooming, of course.
You are absolutely correct … put the camera on a tripod take a few images at different focal lengths you’ll get the same perspective but move the camera/tripod and you’ll get different perspectives.
Great insights. Thanks... Happy New Year !!
Happy new year to you too. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Plenty of great advice here, so thanks Andrew. I have always thought that anyone who says, 'Zoom with your feet' does not understand how their camera functions, and I am sure that little section on the leaf will help lots of your viewers.
Incidentally, I like your aviator jacket - very smart.
Zooming giwyh feet, even arms can help if one simply doesn't have the reach, but that's only to get a bit more reach on a flat surface where one can walk, but that's just basic knowledge, and common sense, but you are right you can't always do that, like in small area, also if shooting up at something you can't walk closer, as that changes the angle.
I tried zooming with my feet, but I just can't get a good enough grip on the zoom ring with my toes.
@ihateunicorns867 😁
Well done, Andrew. What works, works. People are just trying to get clicks. Seems a bit desperate to me. I set everything to "Imagination Priority" and let 'er rip (insert chainsaw sound effects). Been working just fine for 40 years.
Broooooom, Broooom, Peter. One thing I will say is that it's interesting to be trolled by Gary Gough - who has over 100k subs - over how wrong I am about my view that ISO isn't necessarily part of exposure. It's so easy to lose respect for people I find. See you tomorrow?
Got to admit, after moving from the 5DIV to the R5, I'd never go back.
For sure, many cameras are better at certain things than others, just as ships are better bulk carriers than trucks. What I seriously doubt though is whether anybody could tell the difference - or care - about which camera your images were taken with. You will, but I would suggest the reason you won't go back is more the handling and features rather than a negligible - and likely almost invisible - increase in image quality.
@@AndyBannerYou can convert technological gains in image quality to QOL improvements. We reached a point where landscape photographers often can skip bracketing shots, that’s convenient, even though it means the IQ gains are voided.
That's getting rather deep. Yes, some tech gains improve quality of life. But we're talking about, what is for most people, a hobby so your point about IQ gains - really skill rather than IQ - is pertinent. But if you extrapolate this further, with the power of generative AI, why bother at all with a camera of all you want is perfection without the engagement, the process and effort. Why buy a pile of clay, a wheel, kiln and all the other stuff when you can walk into a supermarket and buy a mug?
@@AndyBanner It's the video, not photo's.
@ If photography is about capturing a moment, I see nothing wrong with cameras eventually achieving the same capabilities as our own eyes in terms of dynamic range.
So anything not going beyond what our eyes can do, I’d consider “natural”. And if enjoyed as art as opposed to documentary work, anything is possible I suppose.
I am convinced that natural (and sometimes artificial) limitations make things more fun.
A good analogy would be the world of diverse beverages and drinks: be it tea, coffee, wine - It would not be fun exploring all the different flavors if we just put the flavor that we seek right into them. I like orange notes in my coffee so why not pour orange juice into it? Well, it’s not interesting.
Those channels just exploit our human trait of mimicking others in the hope of improving ourselves, someone claims to be a pro so we think they must have higher skills. Generally it ends up that you just do what you like.I took some nice pics on my first brownie camera, all I could do was point and shoot, aperture and other settings weren’t available to me but it didn’t prevent getting great photos. I’m amused by these people claiming I must do such and such to improve my photos but the followers that hang on their every word are sad.
What you must do to improve your proficiency of anything is practice.
As long as the one taking photos is happy with them and not for making money then who cares, the enjoyment is taking the photos then seeing what works and playing with camera setting to see the results, it’s easy to delete delete delete once your not happy with and enjoy 🥳🥳🥳
If the end recipient of the image is happy, all good. Whether money exchanges is immaterial to the ultimate satisfaction, surely?
As you say, the enjoyment is in the process. Just as your windsurfing - you do it for enjoyment.
@@AndyBanner
Thank you for your reply, I use my smartphone and camera for photos, both have there place, been out today shooting as had snow in the Uk and nice to have different snow photos. Yes love my windsurfing and do it for the pure enjoyment and is 100% own pleasure and have to keep practicing to improve just like photography 🤩🤩🤩🥳🥳🥳
Edited to add, new subscriber 🥳🥳
Sadly, just grey and rain on the Norfolk Coast. I saw suggestion of a dusting in Kings Lynn but nothing worth driving out for. We don't get it much in these parts.
Thanks for subscribing. Welcome on board.
Great video and advice 👍🌲
Thanks
Photography has always been a subjective interest and hobby. What someone says is a wonderful shot can also be felt as crap by the other. I think the best is to just go with what you feel is the best. All opinions and "advice" are just considered as tips and suggestions for you to try, you as the user will be the one to determine for yourself if you want to follow or not. In photography all advices and suggestions are not considered as "the absolute 100% truth". Photography skills are honed by real life trial and error and not by "advices".
I would agree to an extent. But the experiences of others are also the key to learning. As a clear example, the obvious thought pattern from looking at the iris of a lens opening and closing is that it makes the picture larger or smaller not brighter or darker. Experimentation quicky debunks this, but then a great deal more experimentation needs to take place to work out what it actually does do. Much quicker to take advice and knowlegde from someone who already knows.
I guess my point is that learning anything has to be a mix of exchanged knowledge and advice rather than starting at the bottom and finding your way like those that first worked things out.
100% agree … there are some ‘influencers’ who have made themselves ‘rock star’ snappers, talk almost condescendingly and patronisingly into their camera, yet their work and results, whilst sometimes not too shabby, are usually non imaginative, non original, and barely above average. If you dare to talk about the creative genius of the likes of Mayer, McCullin, Killip, Lange, Suzuki, etc who invariably created such inspirational images with the the same single body and prime, they get all hurt and defensive … and take honest critique as a personal attack 😊 📷
I often find critique to be difficult to take and understand how people who have, perhaps unfounded personal belief, would find offense in such. But that's each and every one of us as individuals. I appreciate that I am not a great photographer - competent in some areas, shocking in others. I don't pretend to be anything I am not. I know I have taken some great images - at least to me - but art is subjective. You need to keep a sense of reality and a degree of humility.
@ Sorry I didn’t mean personal critique of their work, I’m not in a position to do that, I meant some of their ‘high brow’ content or professed expertise, especially when promoting gear, techniques or ‘the only way’ to do something. I had one ‘street expert’ who had over 1/2 m subscribers get tetchy when I mentioned Vivian Meyer. He said that she wasn’t necessarily a good street photographer, she just got lucky! … I wish I could be that lucky 😂
I have an inkling I could name the photographer you're talking about.... Yes, Vivian Meyer got lucky suspiciously often...
I guess I was including critique of their comments as well as work. The biggest problem people face is that when they know a little, they aren't sufficiently informed to know what they don't know and so they feel they know a lot. An experienced operator knows what they know and appreciates where there are gaps in their knowledge.
The difficulty for many is that unless you're a real experienced person yourself, knowing that someone's advice is wrong can be difficult.
This is why we have so many armchair experts on every conceivable subject on social media. One of the worst thoughts a human ever had is 'just how hard can it be?' and then feel their abject failure is actually a overwhelming success.
Unsolicited critique is an issue on the internet. Only give critique to people who ask you for it.
Yes. That's the best policy in most cases. There's another problem to in that people, naming no names, disagree with you with phrases like 'Wrong on so many accounts' and then just leave it at that. Err. Care to expand? I am here to learn and if you can show that I am wrong on so many accounts, I can improve. If you just lob in a grenade and retreat, your input is totally worthless and respect for your comments is reduced.
Like any good exam - show your workings out...
I like that I don’t earn from photography. I don’t have to take photos. Maybe I am not the best photographer in the world, but it doesn’t matter. I enjoy the gear I have and I like the images I make . I learn what I can and that’s that.
That's the best most people can expect or need. A hobby is for enjoying, not generating stress.
Thanks Andrew, food for thought throughout .
As a pro of 52 years experience I do laugh at “experts” who look like teenagers giving advice. There are SOME brilliant young photographers. This video is excellent. The difference between pro and amateur is how much they get paid
Do you ahve any recommendations for a camera I should get? I want to get into photography and don’t want to spend to much money
@ A 2nd hand LUMIX G9 or Olympus EM1 Mk 2 or 3. Often found in excellent condition with little use. Lens? 12-40mm f4 Olympus or equivalent LUMIX. I’m starting to prefer the LUMIX because of the LCD screen on top. It allows you to see the most important camera settings without flipping out the screen and bringing up menus
@@ThatGuyKiwiwi I started out with a pocket camera - Sony cyber shot.
The simpler the image the more it beckons the viewer back
Weird for me cause im just figuring my own style and knowledge out as I go and mess about more, eventually i'll get to A good place in the wold of cameras and computers, PC World if you will
In reality, figuring your style will probably take a long time and many iterations. Just enjoy.
If you think photography YT videos are full of false advice, try following those videos projecting political views or world events. 🙄 For the most part, I like the advice I hear from this channel. I do not need to watch videos on ' how to use aperture mode', how to see others with a new way of seeing subjects or compositions is far more usefull. My pet dislike is the " Five tips the Pro's never tell you about ? " .Maybe I've watched too many videos 😄
I am with you on the "5 tips / pros" videos. They get my goat. There's a reason though that these are so prolific - people click on them. If I was making that kind of stuff, I might have hit 30k subs by now. Mind you, this video debunking some of it has been my fastest growing one ever - much to my surprise.
Finally!! Haha.. Thank You for This Video!! This is the Only Tips & Tricks Video Worth Watching!! Lol.
Thanks
IMHO the main difference between an amateur and a pro is just that a pro works as a photographer in order to make a living, nothing more. Hence, he may even deliver lower quality as it can be good enough. A pro may vallue his time more as time is money for someone making a living. This may result in the advice that a Nikon D5 is a better camera as camera x. Because of the properties that save time using the D5 (like iso performenace, lower amount of MB's) etc. etc.
Awesome video with great advice! Subbed
Thank you.
great advice. Love the woodland shot. Many thanks
Thanks for your continued support.
Sadly there is too much unnecessary and repetitive content out there on TH-cam, in part caused by TH-camrs creating for creating sake as they need keep their ranking to get the views to get the money.
In terms of Andrew criticising other photographer's content regarding the value of, or the preference of manual compared to aperture priority, there are times when aperture priority will not cut it, experience will be the teacher as many will find.
Learning manual can help getting to know and understand the abilities and capabilities by mixing ISO, Aperture and Shutter speeds. Even with the computational power of cameras today, the three are so related to each other is it unbelievable. When on full auto, the camera will change the values of all three accordingly, to optimise the image for the lighting conditions. But then there are times when full auto or aperture priority will not give a fast enough shutter speed. Learning and understanding the triangle is important.
Yes Andrew is correct in many situations in your chosen genre, if you compare aperture priority to manual there is very little detectable difference to the eye, when looking at an image on a computer screen or on most prints. The computational power of modern cameras make aperture priority and shutter priority quite often the go to settings. Even auto still has its place for some situations.
It depends on what the user is able to produce themselves from the given settings, or what they prefer the camera to do for them, for what ever reason. If you prefer manual then stick with it, if you prefer aperture or shutter priorities then stick with them. Trial and error will help you find your way. Just as it will with composition, if you like the image, chances are others will and the composition was probably correct for that scene.
In terms of megapixels there is a lot of sense in what Andrew says. My age old full frame Nikon D850 was 44 megapixels I think, whereas my current OM-1 (micro four thirds sensor) has 20 megapixels, and my TG-7 has 12 megapixels, they all produce excellent results on A4 prints which I am happy to display on my wall.
I find that if you are printing up to A4 or even A3 then you do not need a high pixel resolution, but if you are printing above A3, or if you are cropping the image and then printing on A4 then the pixel count does matter.
As your photography improves, and your composition improves, and as your collection of lenses increases, having the right tools and skills for the job means less cropping. Then high pixels are less of a significant factor, especially as the computational power of the camera gets better and better.
I have printed images at considerably larger than a3 from my em1 mk2. The point about reproduction size isn't entirely valid as the larger you make the display, the further back your viewing position. There are limits, for sure, but nobody walks up to a billboard that's 8m wide x 6m high and complains about the resolution.
As with exposure. A, M, P or S all do the same job but in different ways. For long exposures, most cameras will be better in manual but I don't agree that manual is intrinsically better or even different from any priority mode because its all the same control from a different fixed position.
As for unnecessary content. Hmm. I ran technical magazines for some years and there's only so many months that can pass before you have to revisit topics else you run out of things to say. This is not a new problem and it won't go away. Evergreen videos are great, but every so often you will have to repeat things that you have done in the past and that others have done and will do again. That is the nature of the beast.
@@AndyBanner It is true what you say about billboards, and it is true what you say about marketing to sell a camera, but sometimes higher resolution is needed. As many have said, it is not the megapixels that make a great image. For me my 20MP and my 12MP give me excellent images at A4 and occasionally at A3 for display in my home. At these sizes without any cropping there is no noticeable different to those taken at 44MP.
Absolutely, every tool has its use cases. The issue is understanding what they are.
Surely, photography is about the final image. How you obtained that image via camera settings and what gear one used is almost irrelevant. I suspect that these days, most images are manipulated in a computer before being posted online which makes camera settings have even less relevance. Very few people actually care about one’s photos, viewing an image for half a second on an online picture forum before moving onto the next one; so having an “expert” saying you shouldn’t use f8 or 1/125s is rubbish.
I fundamentally disagree with your initial point. As a hobbyist, photography should be about the journey. It's about getting out there and enjoying the process. If you make it only about the image, you will quickly become disenchanted with the hobby because you'll be disappointed with the outcome 95% + of the time.
Settings are irrelevant to anyone other than the photographer because they partly define what YOUR photo will look like. To anyone viewing the final result, the settings might serve as a learning experience to improve of obvious technical flaws, but as a teaching/learning aid, they are virtually pointless.
Funnily enough, the effects of the two basic settings (aperture, shutter speed) are the main thing you cannot yet really alter in post.
@@AndyBanner OK, I concede that I was a little harsh there. I still like to get up early, set my camera up and try and take some awesome pictures; however, I’m still disappointed with the outcome 95% of the time 🤣
Perhaps what you mean is correcting for mistakes in those settings? That's almost impossible generally. But going the other way and selectively blurring or sharpening anything within the image is, of course, much easier. Basically degradation is simpler than refinement in all forms of captured data.
I crap a lot. Opps, I mean I crop a lot. That's why I like megapixels.
Sure, they have their advantages. I am not suggesting otherwise. If you're printing, it's perhaps more important, but if it's just on a screen, far less so.
@ i guess I’ve always wanted a camera like the character Harrison Ford used in the original Blade Runner movie, the one he used to take a picture at the doorway of a suspects apartment. He was able to zoom into the drain in the bathtub and read a serial number from a cell of an artificial life form. I think camera manufacturers have been resting on their laurels for years regarding technology. According to Moore’s law the memory capacity and or processing capability of devices doubles every two years. To me this means the minimum megapixel count of an entry level camera should be over 100 megapixels and the typical one should be over a gigapixel. Nothing would excite the user base more than jumping forward with cameras by advancing memory, processing and sensor capabilities. In my previous flippant comment I said I cropped a lot. My usage case was aviation photography and I found that cropping in was kind of fun to see what was down there on the ground. Best wishes in the new year and your fine TH-cam channel.
Relaxing to watch
I learned from my dad and he still rocks his Canon T2i lol
great narrative on 'edge issues that make or break. thx for the fresh take on the weirdness that youtube has become
Enjoyed watching, though the tilted tripod was bad for my ocd😂
Sorry. I knew i had to trigger someone some how. :-)
Yes, I saw that video and it was ridiculous.
If you have the exposure correct and the camera will do that for you or advise you,
a photo shot in manual will be the same as a photo
shot in AP. The only thing that might be different is the depth of field which depends on aperture.
The comments were even more ridiculous.
It is clear that some of the commentators didn't have a clue about the basics.
They were saying that they preferred manual mode and then were fiddling with ISO and even exposure compensation.
Use your shutter speed or aperture modes, that is what they are there for.
Clearly, these people had never used a film camera and again didn't know the basics.
I have to say that I nearly spat my coffee out watching it. How any experienced photographer can produce such pointless dross is beyond me. I've just been back to read some of the comments too: yes, a smorgasbord of ridiculousness showing just how many people are sucked in by nonsense.
Most annoyed by "photographers" who make "Our camera predictions" videos and "You should shoot everything at ISO 100 and just edit later"....
If you've ever been in a camera club, you'll understand this guy.
I have avoided camera clubs so I can't tell whether this is a dig or a compliment :-)
Many such authorities do not know the smell of film, not to mention the smell of chemicals.
Best advice ever: if your images are bad get a new camera, an expensive one, and preferably a pro camera...
And use my affiliate link? ;-)
Actually more megapixels are objectively better. The question is will you personally benift from them and will it be by enough to base a purchasing decision on? More megapixes isn't just for printing big. When you have more data recorded than you need it is called over sampling. Over sampling has 2 major benifts in photography. First at the same output size, exposure and processing more megapixes mean less apparent noise in the image. Even to a point of beingable to use a higher iso than you normally would. Secondly if you have enough megapixes your 50mm lens can also be a 100mm or even 200mm lens through cropping in post. This can mean not having to cary or even own a short telephoto lens for many use cases. This is made even easier with cameras that have built in 1.5x crop modes. If your output size only requires 2mp, but your camera shoots 16, 24, or 50+mp you have a lot of flexibility in shooting and in post production. Having more data to work with in post helps keep the IQ high while applying significant post processing. So the question isn't whether more MP is better, it inarguably is. The question is how important is that difference vs other facrors when selecting a camera. For most other factors like cost or af performance will mater more than the benifts of say 24mp vs 50mp or 16mp va 24mp.
I haven't said that more pixels are better, only that they are often not necessary. There's also the point about photosite size. You have also fallen into the trap of suggesting that cropping is zooming - it is not. Cropping is cropping.
But yes, I have no argument that more pixels gives greater flexibility and fundamentally agree that it's only useful if you can make use of them.
The problem is that more pixels is the most common metric that people without the knowledge will use to mark one thing as better or worse than another and this is fundamentally wrong. It's the use case that determines the suitability.
We mostly agree. The issue imo with speaking in generalities instead of specifics. The internet loves over simplifications. Like "is x better than y" or "zoom with your feet" or "use x mode" ect. When instead a photographer should be thinking "what is x, how does it compare to what y is and which will benift me the most or produce the image I want." Unfortunately this is often a much more nuanced way to look at it then most people have patience or time for in a youtube video. You are right zooming isn't cropping in post. Changing the lens focal length instead of cropping in post gives you the same image as cropping, just with more mp. So the question is does that matter? Well only the individual photographer can decide that for themselves. My point is discussions of this nature need to talk more about why you would or wouldn't want xyz feature or to do xyz technique instead of making banket statments like "most photographers don't need x." Particularly when talking to beginners.
@@josh885more MP does not result in less noise, that is completely wrong.
@ItsWillLee More mp results in less apparent noise at the same output size as long as the exposures are the same, the processing is the same and the noise performance of the sensors are similar.
The more an image is downsamples from it's capture size, the less apparent noise is. You can try it yourself. Crank up the iso on your camera than make 4 or 5 images starting at 100% and halving the pixel size for each subsequent output. Watch as the noise becomes less and less apparent as the image gets smaller. If an image starts at say 50mp and one starts at say 16mp but are both resized to say 2mp, the 50 mp image has been downsampled much more and will have less apparent noise than the 16mp one. Given same or very close exposures, similar processing, similar sensors tech ect of course.
@@josh885 again, more MP does not equate to less noise...stop
I could not agree with you more ! The most important skill is to learn that you tide is .full of talkers not walkers
I find most TH-cam photographers are actually not any good at photography but they are actually just people who review gear.
Rarely do people review gear on TH-cam. They hold it up and read off a spec sheet. That's about as close to a review as a doctor doing a telephone consultation.
People should probably take structured photography lessons first, and maybe start off with an intermediate camera, even if they can afford to spend $3000 to $5000. What you like to shoot can determine what you spend that money on, which can vary greatly.
Certainly, people should invest more in their skills than their gear in the early stages.
Good stuff, Andy. Thank you
Thank you too.