Confession time: I accidentally deleted the original and back up copy of a portrait I took years ago in RAW & JPEG on my trusty old Nikon. I wanted it for an exhibition I had earlier this year and ended up running a web resolution copy I found through an image upscaler and doing just a bit of tweaking. I was shocked how well it printed and, honestly, I doubt many people could tell when it was on the wall. So completely agree about the allure of the latest tech, and the myth that you always need the shiniest and newest with the most megapixels!
My digital camera is a Nikon D700, with 12 megapixels, the "same" as the iPhone. BUT its sensor is a full frame with the largest pixels ever on a sensor of any size. This makes a difference. One can enlarge images from it up to a meter wide - there are videos on YT of people showing this. Of course it won't have the resolution of a higher resolution camera, like the D800, for exemple, but the images don't jag, don't pixelate. It looks like enlarged film images. That's one of the reasons I love the D700! Well, I'm a film shooter since the 70's, love microcontrast and grain :)
I've been finding recently that the only reason I think my old photos from around a decade ago are terrible now, is only because I was terrible at editing. I've recently pulled up many of my old good shots and re-edited them with the knowledge I have now and it's crazy how much of a factor editing is. New gear and tech and flexibility help, but there's so much potential in the knowledge of editing. I have to note that I just upgraded to the X-T5 after 9 years of shooting with a Canon 6D, so the increase in all specs, including the sensor, have helped me better achieve the vision I have for the photo.
The one real game-changer upgrade for me has been IBIS. Going from an X-T2 to an OM Systems OM5 hasn't improved the quality of my images but it has allowed me to take more shots handheld and therefore improve my hit rate. Context is all important though. I am predominantly a time-crunched woodland photographer and more often than not am in low light situations without the time to always break out the tripod. My point here being that some upgrades are really worth it. You just need to know why.
Low light… try Leica lenses I am still impressed how the Summicron 50 mm 1.4 renders in near dark situations. Its like a painting. I can assure you none of my fuji lenses would render like this. I don’t want to give the lens back but I have to in two weeks….
I bought an OM-5 and 12-45 F4 lens in July. It's not been on a tripod yet, I use it most days for purposes for which it's well suited. I reckon I can make most landscape photographs I made with my dear departed 5Ds, with less tripod use, and a lot more besides.
Fully agree to this. Using Fuji xt2 since 2016 and I don’t see any problems with it. Will probably use it to death before upgrading. An XT3 is probably a very good value camera right now.
Totally agree: On your comments: 3:12 when you zoom in ... WHO WOULD ZOOM IN, as photographers we think to much as a photographer and not as as someone who just look at once picture.. They don't zoom in. Another one: Printing big will show quality loss. Well in the days when 8 and 12 MP were common, there were huge prints and nobody complained cause the bigger you print , the more distance the viewer takes to see the whole image. And what you were forgetting about the latest and greatest marketing features, what about VIDEO. I, myself, don't need video in my photography camera, If I want to shoot video I buy a cheaper 'can do all camera' or go for the real deal. So, thanks for your insights on the subject. Good one about Image Quality and Quality Image 👊 Thanks for sharing
I agree with all these points. In 2006 I bought a Leica D-lux 2 as a sort of digital notebook to grab quick copies of photos I was taking on my Mamiya 7 medium format film camera and it then turned into the only camera I took on travels to New York, India etc. I shot raw at base ISO and always with -1/3 stop exposure compensation. The images are some of my favourites despite being noisier and with less dynamic range than modern cameras. Who cares? Normal people don’t notice when I show them on my iPad. We passed the point of diminishing returns on image quality several years ago so for me it’s the user interface with the camera that matters most.
💯 agree. I would say that the lens makes more of a difference in image quality over camera body. However, I've been shooting mostly on the XS series fujis but do notice better iso, noise, and image quality in low light with the XH2s that I picked up earlier this year. Something about that stacked sensor just works better in low light.
Man - couldn’t agree more. I love how you protect buyers with reasonable advice in a TH-cam market driven by creators seemingly trying to get people constantly upgrading. Your advice and channel has been one of the major influences I have built my business on shoulders of. I picked up a camera (xt4) for the first time two years ago and haven’t stopped shooting since. Somehow, as opportunity and incessant work, would have it, I get to do this professionally. Often still grabbing that same xt4 for client work. Thanks for all your input over the last two years, both through your videos and the generous time you spent responding to my DMs.
Thank you Roman. Image quality versus quality images is such a great reminder to just relax and enjoy shooting with what you have. The constant bombardment from camera companies can make you feel so dissatisfied with what you have and easily turn you into a gear collector instead of a photographer. My Fujifilm APS-C is 10 years old and my Canon APS-C is four years old. Both are great cameras. In some ways they are very different but, both are capable of delivering great images, that is up to me. Cheers.🙏
Hi Dana. I couldn't agree more. I have a Nikon D700 with a 50mm and a GX85 with a 20mm. That's it and they do what I want them to do. I enjoy taking photos with them which is the main thing. Enjoy your weekend
100% agree I still shoot and love my Nikon D700 and vintage lenses. 12MP is more than enough for online use and printing A3+ at 200dpi 🙂 I do love my X-H2 as well for the cropability (it's a word now so…) and ergonomics.
Wise observations, extremely well presented; you capture stunning images, by the way - thank you for sharing and giving the world at large a little slice of visual pleasure!
Well presented discussion of an issue many misunderstand . What makes a quality image is less it's technical perfection but more the inherent positive emotional response one has to it.
I just got a used Micro Four Thirds camera (Lumix GX80) from 2016 ... it's literally missing nothing, it can do more than I need and the images are great. And it's so small I can take it everywhere. The same cannot be said about my X-T3.
The one word I really hate seeing in photography is “obsolete”. Many videos on TH-cam talk about a particular older camera now being “obsolete”, yet the only way a camera can truly become obsolete is if you can no longer buy parts/batteries when repairs are needed or the frequency of visible light somehow magically changes and the sensor no longer captures what you see. All of the great lower-resolution digital images produced in the 1990’s and early 2000’s are still brilliant images.
Roman, First, on this video’s subject -Very well, comprehensively and clearly stated. We should all watch this again before considering a new piece of kit. Second, i’ve watched LOTS of your vids, but some of the images you’ve shown in this vid are really super! Last, personally, i’d just underline the importance of lenses-BUT, price are bigger max aperture doesn’t guarantee that great ‘look’ that some lenses offer us.
I think even 5 years old is conservative. I am still in love with the images I get out of my X-T1 (2014), and I don't need to buy a new hard drive every 6 months to hold all my images either.
I too still use the x-t1. I only got a x-s10 for low light AF indoors and now I have the 100-400, I might need it to track small birds but I got it for sea seascapes.
A real factor in doing photography is "the having fun part" while using what you have, be it an old camera, new camera, small or big camera. You having fun while doing what you love is priceless.
I agree for the most part, however as someone who recently went through a big testing round with multiple cameras (Z9, X-H2, R5, GFX100ii), I will say that the GFX 100 II really could handle highlights significantly better than all the other full frame cameras (and the X-H2). In controlled lighting settings or situations where there's subdued contrast, they're all winners. I do shoot commercially and having that extra bit of DR is certainly an advantage, but wouldn't make or break anyone's work.
I love how down to earth your approach is, wish I've found your account earlier! This is gold and so true - I started my photography journey with a big Canon camera because I thought that's what I need to have to take good photos. I ended up not using the camera that much because of it's size and weight. I didn't know what's happening, so I ended up changing it quite a bit from Canon to Fujifilm until I realised that I want a small camera that will work well for me. I have Sony a6700 now and I love it, especially the flip out screen - but I am thinking if not to get something like Fuji x100V that will be so small and portable, I might end up taking more pictures than I do now. It's a trap of wanting more and more and more, when less actually is more.
Great video and wise words. I still come across a lot of weddings photographers using Canon 5D iii & iv’s, so I’d personally push the time line back to at least 10 years with the right gear. For Fuji, there really is very little if no difference in image quality between the XT2/X-Pro 2 & XT3/X-Pro 3 for example. (I personally shoot with the earlier models because, from experience, the build quality is perceivably better.. but that’s a different story)
I ABSOLUTELY LOVE the images you have shared on Instagram (and in this video) from your trip... stunning.... And somewhat contradictory to the gist of this video, I must ask were they primarily taken with the XH2s or XH2?
"Image quality vs quality images". I am going to borrow that if you don't mind. I am glad so many people are spending time on this issue these days. I lecture at photo clubs on occasion, and I spend a lot of time undoing the damage those environments cause to new photographers. Photo clubs (where I live at least) are often filled with older people who are retired, bored and love gadgets. So they buy into the gear. And the clubs host competitions where judges obsess over things like sharpness, histograms, dynamic range and other technical aspects. So I walk in there and talk about storytelling, composition, aesthetics and emotive quality, and it really messes with some people who've been conditioned to obsess over gear. I present work and they ask me, "What camera did you use? What lens did you use? Do you use Lightroom? What monitor are you using?" And it's really hard to convince people that those are just tools, and I want them to learn to see before they worry about tools.
I have shot photos 20 years with digital cameras and I have had lots of different cameras and I still have multiple cameras, but finally I have noticed that most important thing for me is "the feeling" WHEN all the necessary requirements are met (quality of photos is good for my usage, usability is good, I can shoot with it what I prefer to shoot). I bought 10 year old camera last month even I have much newer ones (Canon R50, Fujifilm X-T2) and I have had newer ones previously as well. Still with this 10 year old point-and-shoot Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) I have shot so much more than with many other cameras I have owned much longer times. It just feels good, it is fun to use, photo quality is good for me and I just love to use it. The more I want to shoot with camera because "it just feels fun" the more I learn to become better photographer :)
I agree, for me and some people it’s more about the look or colors the camera/sensor produces. Why I “upgraded” to a Leica M9 even though it’s like 10yrs older and with 10 less mp than my previous camera lol
Most of the greatest photographs taken over the last nearly 200 years were using film, which is grainy, unsharp and low resolution compared to modern digital images. And yet they are still great. It's the story told, not the pen.
I agree with your general message and assume you're just comparing old 400iso 35mm to modern digital. However, some people in the comments might be beginners, and none of them should have the perspective that film is simply "grainy, unsharp, and low resolution". 120, 4x5, & 8x10 film resolve astounding amounts of detail, that easily rivals or surpasses the detail seen modern consumer/prosumer digital cameras.
Quality is in the eye of the beholder. Definition of quality also varies based on type of photography. In this regard, I think Roman makes a convincing argument of not taking “better camera = better quality” claims at face value, and also of the importance of keeping in mind the photographer’s actual needs.
To be honest even when I upgraded from an APS-C to a Full Frame I didn't see as big of a difference in image quality as I was expecting. These days it is hard to resist buying new shiny stuff constantly but it is a skill we need to build
I print my favourite photos at 45x30cm for my office wall. I can't tell you what is in the corners of any of them. Or which camera or lens they're from... or whether the screen was flipped out at 30 degrees or 45... I just like the photos 😊
I shoot on film and digital Leica, and I see people shoot great image with 10 years old Leica digital camera. When you talk about image quality vs and quality images is the real deal. A good photo is good photo, no matter the gear
Wow the images and videos from Morocco had amazing colours! I'd love to figure out how to get those colours. Is it a specific film simulation you used? Or is there a place where I can learn how you edited them?
I’m still on an XT-1, and vintage lenses. It’s good enough IQ and it’s fun. I don’t care for a second about lenses, charts, specs, or TH-cam reviews. I would rather shoot and enjoy my time.
Whenever people ask me for advice. I’m like, any camera would do the job for photography, especially if it was released after 2015. I’ve been shooting with an xpro2 for almost 7 years 😂
Same applies to DJing, you get all these people rabidly defending the ‘sync button’ (that essentially does the mixing for you) with lines like ‘it frees me up to be more creative’ (heard that one before? Autofocus, sensor size/DOF )…. Yet DJ mixes are more uninspiring and formulaic than ever, and much like photography, those who shout the loudest about it are never showing their work to anyone, it’s always anonymous.
For photos cameras havent changed that much in terms of quality. But for video, the changes are huge. Almost every camera can shoot 4k now. That wasnt the case like 10 years ago. So gear matters more for filmmakers I guess.
I will add that judging photo quality is also about the lens you use. A great lens will produce better result even on a mediocre camera that viceversa.
Any bad phone nowadays is sharper than whatever Man Ray used. But... we're not Man Ray. So, enjoy what you have to the fullest, don't buy more than what you need. Don't fall on marketing promisses. ONE CAMERA, ONE LENS is the best technique you need to take better pictures. Two lenses will distract you. A zoom lens too. In the end I use mostly my Rolleiflex 3.5F or my Rollei 35, which have fixed lenses. My Nikons and lenses stay at at home. I shoot since the 1970's, you can believe me or not. But someday you'll come to the same conclusions :) And I still shoot film and have a darkroom! Thanks for the video, hope it makes people think and save money for better things, as you mentioned. All the best!
I have this bizarre thing where I feel like I'm going to destroy my X-H2S if I throw it into my casual daily bag, so I use a X-T2 and it's just absolutely refreshing to have handy for when I have a photo opportunity. :)
I spent the first ten years or more in my digital camera experience starting with the Nikon D200. Then moving through that family slowly upgrading, D200, D300 and then the best upgrade of them so far, the D800. The 800 was a jump in quality from the 300 mainly in depth and lower ISO capabilities. I wanted and needed those two things. But by the time I got the D800 it was well over 10 years old in technology but I feel it will satisfy me for the rest of my career. That is, as long as I can keep finding them to use. :P
The bigger challenge to explain to people is that many modern features today are not directly present in I.Q. They are features that can be used in the editing workflow. The reality is if I take an image with a sensor that has 14 stops of dynamic range, once I render that for digital display, it will only have 7ish stops of dynamic range in it. If I take a video in 8k, once I render it for TH-cam, it will only be 4k max. If I take a 100-megapixel sensor image to print, the P.P.I will affect how much I can upscale it. You won't see any real improvement in the final output of the image, but the latitude within editing the image will be greater. Modern features today are mostly for editing, not final output.
@@petermcginty3636 Ive seen my work published as low 150 PPI on an A4 page. If we take Vogue magazine as the standard, it is a combination of paper type, and they request all images be at 300ppi, so if they need to enlarge it will still look crisp at their normal output of 220 PPI.
I use Sony and have many of the older models A35, A55, A57, A58, A65, A77, A77ii and the A7ii and they all take good photos. I also have several compact cameras, all Sony HX50, HX90 ZV-1 and the all take good good photos. I also have two donkey bridge cameras, err Sony!!!, and they both take good photos. Now my best photos occurred randomly on one or other of these cameras!! And I honestly don't think the cameras is that important. Sometimes a 16 megapixel image on the A35 is amazing and other times it's an image from my more modern, although still very old A7ii. The crux of the matter is that good photo have very little to do with the camera but a lot to do with the photographer. So, get out as often as you can and just look and shoot whatever catches your eye and eventually you will capture more and more great images regardless of what equipment you use.
Agree somewhat, but you cannot tell me that the AF on an xt30 or xt20 on Fuji is actually any good compared to something like the newer Sony cameras. You miss so many shots (not down to user experience)just due to it being rubbish, so yeah I think these features for me anyway are massive
Same goes to earphone and headphone nowadays, after ANC as main selling point instead of sound quality, I don't want isolate myself to possibility to ave conversation with people to digital content that will not die out as long as there is healthy humanity exist
super wonderful advice! Use what you have! Nobody anywhere needs all this 30+ Megapixels.! Who really makes wall sized prints? Laughable! I love my old film cameras and lousy old scanner. More than good enough for internet views.Have I had massive prints done? Yes! But not every day,week, month,years,decades.. My advice make images! Use your phone, a SLR, maybe a RF like Leica.The latter I don't recommend to new photographers.. You still here! Go out and expose!
I've got an X-T5, so I feel like technical-wise, I'll be good on that for 10 years. But you know what I picked up the other day? A Nikon D800. (A 12 year old DSLR). Why? Oh, I just wanted to try a full frame rig, knew it was inexpensive, and thought it'd be fun to try and get good snaps from it. So instead of chasing newer and better, I swear I think the only lingering GAS I have (minus ye old red dot) is just for trying out some of the "cult" favorites, like the X-T3, or maybe even an OG XPro or something. MAYBE even a m43, because why not be insane?
It's more important to have good lens and knowing how to use your camera. The latest model will not make me a better photographer, just a broke photographer. What will make me a better photographer are workshops, seminars, criticism, study and shooting in situations that are out of my comfort zone.
Let say money isn't a thing to consider, I like Hasselblads HNCS, and it's latest eq. 16-28mm lens can be cropped a lot to act as a zoom as well, I like to keep things as minimal as possible tho, is it still a good direction to go or better get my planned path which is a Zf with 28-400mm f4-8 lens, maybe now the more versatile rumoured Tamron 20-400mm f4-7.1 lens, I shoot artistic look and isn't after the bokeh but I sure at that distance it can when I need that kind of look for certain objectives, also is shooting with PASM camera really shoot like a computer and dedicated dials camera is more fun as they said?
I get it, but I'm an electronics addict. I cannot stop upgrading electronics including my camera... Canon loves suckers like me. But I usually find that the upgrades make my photography better. The new features let me focus more on the composition rather than the settings... so there is a benefit. Don't judge me because I have to find justifications for my spending.
I use a 5D mark I despite having an R6. 2005 vs 2021. It's not an awful sensor, it just doesn't hold your hand at all. Exposure and focus and all that isn't nearly so.. accurate. But it still works. My 6D's screen died so I finally upgraded.
The only problem i have with my camera is the awful noise and awful color it has when recording video (I have an a7rii from 2015) and ultra compressed video, so you cant color grade anything and shaky too with horrible rolling shutter. I guess its actually a big problem hahah. For photos i don't need more, the autofocus misses like 30% of the time when in low contrast scenarios but i guess i'm accustomed to it. If only the FX3 wasn't so damn expensive (i want a full frame film camera)
I use old Fuji's and would never consider the newest AI-bulls*it-driven modern "cameras". An old camera makes you proud of your shot, because you know that they are more complicated to use and have little to no assistance. Image quality can be bought, quality images cannot.
I have an xpro 2 and xt4, there is not difference in image quality, I think any camera made in the last 15 years is good enough, the Canon 5dmk2 still produces amazing images
Images taken with my Sony a5100 (2014) are indiscernible from those taken by my a6400 (2019). Call me skeptical but I don't really see what 2025 has to offer that's going to blow my mind.
This has never made sense to me cause all the great photos that we love were taken on cameras considers inferior to today’s standard. Everything from autofocus, megapixels & so on. Those photos were taken on old equipment, I find it funny how easily people got fooled.
Deleted my earlier comment because I didn't pay attention and thought it was the usual "image quality doesn't matter"; hence my comment was irrelevant, my bad. Although I don't like the thought that "most people look at photos on smartphones, so more iq is irrelevant". I think it's dangerous to orient one's own photography towards what one sees on instagram. As a professional you consider what your client wants, but as a hobbyist you should consider how you want to see the image rather than how most people are going to see it. That one nice print on your wall matters more that 1000 likes in instagram.
@@djstuc that's entirely besides the point; which was that you should shoot for yourself, not social media. But while 16mp can make for nice prints, you can still see the difference. I can tell you from personal experience that even on an A4 print I can see the difference between 24 and 60mp.
@@ChrisThe1 And yet cadburys ran an advertising campaign with 8ft bus stop prints from a 26mp X-T3… but rando on TH-cam ‘can tell the difference at A4’ Seems legit
@@djstuc clearly "randos on youtube" don't understand billboards. They usually have as low as 2mp. They are far from a standard of quality. This is precisely what pisses me off about the "image quality doesn't matter" argument. Photography doesn't matter. You don't need a camera; you don't need to take pictures. It's all for fun. If people enjoy their pictures with better resolution, let them. You don't have a single good reason to shit on other's hobbies.
@@ChrisThe1 I said bus stop print, viewed close up from street level, seems your reading comprehension skills are about as good as your ability to understand print quality.
I don’t know if this is because I watch everyone, or if you have covered this topic multiple times, but I’m tired of hearing this. While it is important to make this point, I think you’re better off making more entertaining content by using a lower quality camera and showing your results. Use a camera that is not modern interchangeable lens mirrorless system, and instead something like a point and shoot. Tom Calton does this all the time, (though I wish he wouldn’t only use Sonys) and it’s really fun and educational.
For photos cameras havent changed that much in terms of quality. But for video, the changes are huge. Almost every camera can shoot 4k now. That wasnt the case like 10 years ago. So gear matters more for filmmakers I guess.
Confession time: I accidentally deleted the original and back up copy of a portrait I took years ago in RAW & JPEG on my trusty old Nikon. I wanted it for an exhibition I had earlier this year and ended up running a web resolution copy I found through an image upscaler and doing just a bit of tweaking. I was shocked how well it printed and, honestly, I doubt many people could tell when it was on the wall. So completely agree about the allure of the latest tech, and the myth that you always need the shiniest and newest with the most megapixels!
My digital camera is a Nikon D700, with 12 megapixels, the "same" as the iPhone. BUT its sensor is a full frame with the largest pixels ever on a sensor of any size. This makes a difference. One can enlarge images from it up to a meter wide - there are videos on YT of people showing this. Of course it won't have the resolution of a higher resolution camera, like the D800, for exemple, but the images don't jag, don't pixelate. It looks like enlarged film images. That's one of the reasons I love the D700!
Well, I'm a film shooter since the 70's, love microcontrast and grain :)
Make a dither layer and chuck that on top with a blend layer and you can take it Even further
I've been finding recently that the only reason I think my old photos from around a decade ago are terrible now, is only because I was terrible at editing. I've recently pulled up many of my old good shots and re-edited them with the knowledge I have now and it's crazy how much of a factor editing is. New gear and tech and flexibility help, but there's so much potential in the knowledge of editing.
I have to note that I just upgraded to the X-T5 after 9 years of shooting with a Canon 6D, so the increase in all specs, including the sensor, have helped me better achieve the vision I have for the photo.
The one real game-changer upgrade for me has been IBIS. Going from an X-T2 to an OM Systems OM5 hasn't improved the quality of my images but it has allowed me to take more shots handheld and therefore improve my hit rate. Context is all important though. I am predominantly a time-crunched woodland photographer and more often than not am in low light situations without the time to always break out the tripod. My point here being that some upgrades are really worth it. You just need to know why.
Low light… try Leica lenses I am still impressed how the Summicron 50 mm 1.4 renders in near dark situations. Its like a painting. I can assure you none of my fuji lenses would render like this. I don’t want to give the lens back but I have to in two weeks….
@@beyourself9162 Does Leica have M43 lenses?
I bought an OM-5 and 12-45 F4 lens in July. It's not been on a tripod yet, I use it most days for purposes for which it's well suited. I reckon I can make most landscape photographs I made with my dear departed 5Ds, with less tripod use, and a lot more besides.
Fully agree to this. Using Fuji xt2 since 2016 and I don’t see any problems with it. Will probably use it to death before upgrading. An XT3 is probably a very good value camera right now.
Chasing latest and greatest over a time gets a person far from photography into a sick sort of addiction. Great message by this video you are sending!
Totally agree:
On your comments: 3:12 when you zoom in ... WHO WOULD ZOOM IN, as photographers we think to much as a photographer and not as as someone who just look at once picture.. They don't zoom in.
Another one: Printing big will show quality loss. Well in the days when 8 and 12 MP were common, there were huge prints and nobody complained cause the bigger you print , the more distance the viewer takes to see the whole image.
And what you were forgetting about the latest and greatest marketing features, what about VIDEO.
I, myself, don't need video in my photography camera,
If I want to shoot video I buy a cheaper 'can do all camera' or go for the real deal.
So, thanks for your insights on the subject.
Good one about Image Quality and Quality Image 👊
Thanks for sharing
Thank you Roman, I really appreciate your views on camera gear and photography.
I agree with all these points. In 2006 I bought a Leica D-lux 2 as a sort of digital notebook to grab quick copies of photos I was taking on my Mamiya 7 medium format film camera and it then turned into the only camera I took on travels to New York, India etc. I shot raw at base ISO and always with -1/3 stop exposure compensation. The images are some of my favourites despite being noisier and with less dynamic range than modern cameras. Who cares? Normal people don’t notice when I show them on my iPad. We passed the point of diminishing returns on image quality several years ago so for me it’s the user interface with the camera that matters most.
I knew from the opening of this video & your past presentations,my answer is "quality image". You have taught me well......
💯 agree. I would say that the lens makes more of a difference in image quality over camera body.
However,
I've been shooting mostly on the XS series fujis but do notice better iso, noise, and image quality in low light with the XH2s that I picked up earlier this year. Something about that stacked sensor just works better in low light.
Man - couldn’t agree more. I love how you protect buyers with reasonable advice in a TH-cam market driven by creators seemingly trying to get people constantly upgrading.
Your advice and channel has been one of the major influences I have built my business on shoulders of. I picked up a camera (xt4) for the first time two years ago and haven’t stopped shooting since. Somehow, as opportunity and incessant work, would have it, I get to do this professionally. Often still grabbing that same xt4 for client work.
Thanks for all your input over the last two years, both through your videos and the generous time you spent responding to my DMs.
Thank you Roman. Image quality versus quality images is such a great reminder to just relax and enjoy shooting with what you have. The constant bombardment from camera companies can make you feel so dissatisfied with what you have and easily turn you into a gear collector instead of a photographer. My Fujifilm APS-C is 10 years old and my Canon APS-C is four years old. Both are great cameras. In some ways they are very different but, both are capable of delivering great images, that is up to me. Cheers.🙏
Hi Dana. I couldn't agree more. I have a Nikon D700 with a 50mm and a GX85 with a 20mm. That's it and they do what I want them to do. I enjoy taking photos with them which is the main thing. Enjoy your weekend
Fantastiskt Roman would love to go there seems to be a fantastiskt Place for photography stay safe and watch your back🤗
100% agree
I still shoot and love my Nikon D700 and vintage lenses. 12MP is more than enough for online use and printing A3+ at 200dpi 🙂
I do love my X-H2 as well for the cropability (it's a word now so…) and ergonomics.
Thank you and have a very good trip. I enjoyed your images.
Wise observations, extremely well presented; you capture stunning images, by the way - thank you for sharing and giving the world at large a little slice of visual pleasure!
Well presented discussion of an issue many misunderstand . What makes a quality image is less it's technical perfection but more the inherent positive emotional response one has to it.
Love Merzouga... Getting up in the dark for the sunrise in the desert there and taking some pics is something i will never forget. Enjoy!
I just got a used Micro Four Thirds camera (Lumix GX80) from 2016 ... it's literally missing nothing, it can do more than I need and the images are great.
And it's so small I can take it everywhere. The same cannot be said about my X-T3.
Love the GX80! What lens do you use?
@@coxbright the Lumix 20mm f/1.7. Tiny combo, but great image quality. I love it.
@@BlueberryFennec Same here!
The image at 3:19 blew me away. Bravo.
I’m moving away from Fuji but your photography advice is so on the money I won’t be going anywhere. Frankly it’s a pleasure just to enjoy your photos.
The one word I really hate seeing in photography is “obsolete”. Many videos on TH-cam talk about a particular older camera now being “obsolete”, yet the only way a camera can truly become obsolete is if you can no longer buy parts/batteries when repairs are needed or the frequency of visible light somehow magically changes and the sensor no longer captures what you see. All of the great lower-resolution digital images produced in the 1990’s and early 2000’s are still brilliant images.
Roman, First, on this video’s subject -Very well, comprehensively and clearly stated. We should all watch this again before considering a new piece of kit. Second, i’ve watched LOTS of your vids, but some of the images you’ve shown in this vid are really super! Last, personally, i’d just underline the importance of lenses-BUT, price are bigger max aperture doesn’t guarantee that great ‘look’ that some lenses offer us.
I use a Fujifilm XT200 and I love it to death. It doesn’t have all the buttons of others but it has taught me so much about photography.
That camera launched me into Fujifilm. So it has kinda cost me several grand by now 😂
@@JohnAlternative-o6h 🤣
Id add IBIS or lens stabilization to your list.
I think even 5 years old is conservative. I am still in love with the images I get out of my X-T1 (2014), and I don't need to buy a new hard drive every 6 months to hold all my images either.
I too still use the x-t1. I only got a x-s10 for low light AF indoors and now I have the 100-400, I might need it to track small birds but I got it for sea seascapes.
A real factor in doing photography is "the having fun part" while using what you have, be it an old camera, new camera, small or big camera. You having fun while doing what you love is priceless.
I agree for the most part, however as someone who recently went through a big testing round with multiple cameras (Z9, X-H2, R5, GFX100ii), I will say that the GFX 100 II really could handle highlights significantly better than all the other full frame cameras (and the X-H2). In controlled lighting settings or situations where there's subdued contrast, they're all winners. I do shoot commercially and having that extra bit of DR is certainly an advantage, but wouldn't make or break anyone's work.
I love how down to earth your approach is, wish I've found your account earlier! This is gold and so true - I started my photography journey with a big Canon camera because I thought that's what I need to have to take good photos. I ended up not using the camera that much because of it's size and weight. I didn't know what's happening, so I ended up changing it quite a bit from Canon to Fujifilm until I realised that I want a small camera that will work well for me. I have Sony a6700 now and I love it, especially the flip out screen - but I am thinking if not to get something like Fuji x100V that will be so small and portable, I might end up taking more pictures than I do now. It's a trap of wanting more and more and more, when less actually is more.
Great video and wise words. I still come across a lot of weddings photographers using Canon 5D iii & iv’s, so I’d personally push the time line back to at least 10 years with the right gear. For Fuji, there really is very little if no difference in image quality between the XT2/X-Pro 2 & XT3/X-Pro 3 for example. (I personally shoot with the earlier models because, from experience, the build quality is perceivably better.. but that’s a different story)
I ABSOLUTELY LOVE the images you have shared on Instagram (and in this video) from your trip... stunning....
And somewhat contradictory to the gist of this video, I must ask were they primarily taken with the XH2s or XH2?
"Image quality vs quality images". I am going to borrow that if you don't mind.
I am glad so many people are spending time on this issue these days. I lecture at photo clubs on occasion, and I spend a lot of time undoing the damage those environments cause to new photographers. Photo clubs (where I live at least) are often filled with older people who are retired, bored and love gadgets. So they buy into the gear. And the clubs host competitions where judges obsess over things like sharpness, histograms, dynamic range and other technical aspects. So I walk in there and talk about storytelling, composition, aesthetics and emotive quality, and it really messes with some people who've been conditioned to obsess over gear. I present work and they ask me, "What camera did you use? What lens did you use? Do you use Lightroom? What monitor are you using?" And it's really hard to convince people that those are just tools, and I want them to learn to see before they worry about tools.
I have shot photos 20 years with digital cameras and I have had lots of different cameras and I still have multiple cameras, but finally I have noticed that most important thing for me is "the feeling" WHEN all the necessary requirements are met (quality of photos is good for my usage, usability is good, I can shoot with it what I prefer to shoot). I bought 10 year old camera last month even I have much newer ones (Canon R50, Fujifilm X-T2) and I have had newer ones previously as well. Still with this 10 year old point-and-shoot Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) I have shot so much more than with many other cameras I have owned much longer times. It just feels good, it is fun to use, photo quality is good for me and I just love to use it. The more I want to shoot with camera because "it just feels fun" the more I learn to become better photographer :)
Image quality vs. quality image…perfect!
I agree, for me and some people it’s more about the look or colors the camera/sensor produces. Why I “upgraded” to a Leica M9 even though it’s like 10yrs older and with 10 less mp than my previous camera lol
Roman, if you can, go down to Ouarzazate & Ait Benhaddou 👍🏻📸
Thanks Roman, love the channel 🙂 all the best from Kent. (Pro headshot photographer)
I completely agree. This is why I use an 11 year old and 7 year old cameras - Fujifilm X-Pro2 and Sony RX1. There’s not need for anything else really
Most of the greatest photographs taken over the last nearly 200 years were using film, which is grainy, unsharp and low resolution compared to modern digital images.
And yet they are still great.
It's the story told, not the pen.
I agree with your general message and assume you're just comparing old 400iso 35mm to modern digital.
However, some people in the comments might be beginners, and none of them should have the perspective that film is simply "grainy, unsharp, and low resolution".
120, 4x5, & 8x10 film resolve astounding amounts of detail, that easily rivals or surpasses the detail seen modern consumer/prosumer digital cameras.
Quality is in the eye of the beholder. Definition of quality also varies based on type of photography. In this regard, I think Roman makes a convincing argument of not taking “better camera = better quality” claims at face value, and also of the importance of keeping in mind the photographer’s actual needs.
Another great one
Good point of view !
To be honest even when I upgraded from an APS-C to a Full Frame I didn't see as big of a difference in image quality as I was expecting. These days it is hard to resist buying new shiny stuff constantly but it is a skill we need to build
It's mainly lowlight at high iso, or if you crazy edit shadows and highlights.
I print my favourite photos at 45x30cm for my office wall. I can't tell you what is in the corners of any of them. Or which camera or lens they're from... or whether the screen was flipped out at 30 degrees or 45... I just like the photos 😊
I shoot on film and digital Leica, and I see people shoot great image with 10 years old Leica digital camera. When you talk about image quality vs and quality images is the real deal. A good photo is good photo, no matter the gear
So true! Great video as always 🤙🏻
Great advice, thanks.
Wow the images and videos from Morocco had amazing colours! I'd love to figure out how to get those colours. Is it a specific film simulation you used? Or is there a place where I can learn how you edited them?
Solid stuff!
I’m still on an XT-1, and vintage lenses.
It’s good enough IQ and it’s fun.
I don’t care for a second about lenses, charts, specs, or TH-cam reviews.
I would rather shoot and enjoy my time.
Whenever people ask me for advice. I’m like, any camera would do the job for photography, especially if it was released after 2015. I’ve been shooting with an xpro2 for almost 7 years 😂
I love your work!
@@alfabravo80 thanks!!
Better equipment than any time in history but nobody is making memorable heartfelt images.
Same applies to DJing, you get all these people rabidly defending the ‘sync button’ (that essentially does the mixing for you) with lines like ‘it frees me up to be more creative’ (heard that one before? Autofocus, sensor size/DOF )…. Yet DJ mixes are more uninspiring and formulaic than ever, and much like photography, those who shout the loudest about it are never showing their work to anyone, it’s always anonymous.
I cannot agree more 👍👍👍👍👍
I love the first photos, they look like mini people.
For photos cameras havent changed that much in terms of quality. But for video, the changes are huge. Almost every camera can shoot 4k now. That wasnt the case like 10 years ago.
So gear matters more for filmmakers I guess.
curious to know how old your current camera is.
I will add that judging photo quality is also about the lens you use. A great lens will produce better result even on a mediocre camera that viceversa.
Any bad phone nowadays is sharper than whatever Man Ray used. But... we're not Man Ray. So, enjoy what you have to the fullest, don't buy more than what you need. Don't fall on marketing promisses.
ONE CAMERA, ONE LENS is the best technique you need to take better pictures. Two lenses will distract you. A zoom lens too. In the end I use mostly my Rolleiflex 3.5F or my Rollei 35, which have fixed lenses. My Nikons and lenses stay at at home. I shoot since the 1970's, you can believe me or not. But someday you'll come to the same conclusions :)
And I still shoot film and have a darkroom!
Thanks for the video, hope it makes people think and save money for better things, as you mentioned. All the best!
itraveledthere AI fixes this (AI Travel / Dating profile headshots). Produced by Roman Fox.
Great as usual Thanks
I have this bizarre thing where I feel like I'm going to destroy my X-H2S if I throw it into my casual daily bag, so I use a X-T2 and it's just absolutely refreshing to have handy for when I have a photo opportunity. :)
I spent the first ten years or more in my digital camera experience starting with the Nikon D200. Then moving through that family slowly upgrading, D200, D300 and then the best upgrade of them so far, the D800. The 800 was a jump in quality from the 300 mainly in depth and lower ISO capabilities. I wanted and needed those two things. But by the time I got the D800 it was well over 10 years old in technology but I feel it will satisfy me for the rest of my career. That is, as long as I can keep finding them to use. :P
The bigger challenge to explain to people is that many modern features today are not directly present in I.Q. They are features that can be used in the editing workflow. The reality is if I take an image with a sensor that has 14 stops of dynamic range, once I render that for digital display, it will only have 7ish stops of dynamic range in it. If I take a video in 8k, once I render it for TH-cam, it will only be 4k max. If I take a 100-megapixel sensor image to print, the P.P.I will affect how much I can upscale it. You won't see any real improvement in the final output of the image, but the latitude within editing the image will be greater. Modern features today are mostly for editing, not final output.
What PPI do you set in your camera/editing software? I use 350ppi. Is that ok for consumer grade photo books?
@@petermcginty3636 Ive seen my work published as low 150 PPI on an A4 page. If we take Vogue magazine as the standard, it is a combination of paper type, and they request all images be at 300ppi, so if they need to enlarge it will still look crisp at their normal output of 220 PPI.
I have a Nikon D810 and it was second hand when I bought it. If and when it dies before I do Ill probably get another.
I use Sony and have many of the older models A35, A55, A57, A58, A65, A77, A77ii and the A7ii and they all take good photos. I also have several compact cameras, all Sony HX50, HX90 ZV-1 and the all take good good photos. I also have two donkey bridge cameras, err Sony!!!, and they both take good photos. Now my best photos occurred randomly on one or other of these cameras!! And I honestly don't think the cameras is that important. Sometimes a 16 megapixel image on the A35 is amazing and other times it's an image from my more modern, although still very old A7ii.
The crux of the matter is that good photo have very little to do with the camera but a lot to do with the photographer. So, get out as often as you can and just look and shoot whatever catches your eye and eventually you will capture more and more great images regardless of what equipment you use.
Agree somewhat, but you cannot tell me that the AF on an xt30 or xt20 on Fuji is actually any good compared to something like the newer Sony cameras. You miss so many shots (not down to user experience)just due to it being rubbish, so yeah I think these features for me anyway are massive
Same goes to earphone and headphone nowadays, after ANC as main selling point instead of sound quality, I don't want isolate myself to possibility to ave conversation with people to digital content that will not die out as long as there is healthy humanity exist
I'm rocking a Olympus M10 markii almost 10 years old
Top vid as ever
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.
-- Henri Cartier-Bresson
super wonderful advice! Use what you have! Nobody anywhere needs all this 30+ Megapixels.! Who really makes wall sized prints? Laughable! I love my old film cameras and lousy old scanner. More than good enough for internet views.Have I had massive prints done? Yes! But not every day,week, month,years,decades.. My advice make images! Use your phone, a SLR, maybe a RF like Leica.The latter I don't recommend to new photographers.. You still here! Go out and expose!
The xpro2 can create gorgeous looking noise. I never remove it when it looks good to the scene….
I've got an X-T5, so I feel like technical-wise, I'll be good on that for 10 years. But you know what I picked up the other day? A Nikon D800. (A 12 year old DSLR). Why? Oh, I just wanted to try a full frame rig, knew it was inexpensive, and thought it'd be fun to try and get good snaps from it.
So instead of chasing newer and better, I swear I think the only lingering GAS I have (minus ye old red dot) is just for trying out some of the "cult" favorites, like the X-T3, or maybe even an OG XPro or something. MAYBE even a m43, because why not be insane?
It's more important to have good lens and knowing how to use your camera. The latest model will not make me a better photographer, just a broke photographer. What will make me a better photographer are workshops, seminars, criticism, study and shooting in situations that are out of my comfort zone.
After 50’ish years of amateur photography the one thing I’ve learned, at least for me, is content trumps everything.
Let say money isn't a thing to consider, I like Hasselblads HNCS, and it's latest eq. 16-28mm lens can be cropped a lot to act as a zoom as well, I like to keep things as minimal as possible tho, is it still a good direction to go or better get my planned path which is a Zf with 28-400mm f4-8 lens, maybe now the more versatile rumoured Tamron 20-400mm f4-7.1 lens, I shoot artistic look and isn't after the bokeh but I sure at that distance it can when I need that kind of look for certain objectives, also is shooting with PASM camera really shoot like a computer and dedicated dials camera is more fun as they said?
Condivido uso la XH1 e va benissimo ho la serie F2 e 2,8 vanno piu" che bene giusto per cambiare prendero" qualche 1,4 .
I want imperfection and character. That's why I prefer shooting with the older X100T. My X-T3 is collecting dust 🤷
I get it, but I'm an electronics addict. I cannot stop upgrading electronics including my camera... Canon loves suckers like me. But I usually find that the upgrades make my photography better. The new features let me focus more on the composition rather than the settings... so there is a benefit. Don't judge me because I have to find justifications for my spending.
Helmut Newton about gear: th-cam.com/video/gWmCjrTIq9E/w-d-xo.html - There is nothing to add ☝
I still use my old 5d mark2 even though i have a 5d m4
I use a 5D mark I despite having an R6. 2005 vs 2021. It's not an awful sensor, it just doesn't hold your hand at all. Exposure and focus and all that isn't nearly so.. accurate. But it still works. My 6D's screen died so I finally upgraded.
The only problem i have with my camera is the awful noise and awful color it has when recording video (I have an a7rii from 2015) and ultra compressed video, so you cant color grade anything and shaky too with horrible rolling shutter. I guess its actually a big problem hahah. For photos i don't need more, the autofocus misses like 30% of the time when in low contrast scenarios but i guess i'm accustomed to it. If only the FX3 wasn't so damn expensive (i want a full frame film camera)
That's the reason why I didn't upgrade from xt3 to xt5
Low-resolution photos create the kind of atmosphere that high-resolution photos can't achieve.
We had excelent photography so many years ago, without all this tech of nowdays.
What we need is more practice.
I use old Fuji's and would never consider the newest AI-bulls*it-driven modern "cameras". An old camera makes you proud of your shot, because you know that they are more complicated to use and have little to no assistance. Image quality can be bought, quality images cannot.
One either has an eye or one doesn’t. The rest is tech and can be learned in a week.
Hear hear
I have an xpro 2 and xt4, there is not difference in image quality, I think any camera made in the last 15 years is good enough, the Canon 5dmk2 still produces amazing images
I only by new cameras because my accountant asks me to.
Images taken with my Sony a5100 (2014) are indiscernible from those taken by my a6400 (2019). Call me skeptical but I don't really see what 2025 has to offer that's going to blow my mind.
This has never made sense to me cause all the great photos that we love were taken on cameras considers inferior to today’s standard. Everything from autofocus, megapixels & so on. Those photos were taken on old equipment, I find it funny how easily people got fooled.
I so dislike people when I realize people will be looking at my images on a phone.
Why do photographs need to be sharp?
Deleted my earlier comment because I didn't pay attention and thought it was the usual "image quality doesn't matter"; hence my comment was irrelevant, my bad. Although I don't like the thought that "most people look at photos on smartphones, so more iq is irrelevant". I think it's dangerous to orient one's own photography towards what one sees on instagram. As a professional you consider what your client wants, but as a hobbyist you should consider how you want to see the image rather than how most people are going to see it. That one nice print on your wall matters more that 1000 likes in instagram.
People have been making prints on their walls for decades, anything 16mp or above will allow for huge prints.
@@djstuc that's entirely besides the point; which was that you should shoot for yourself, not social media. But while 16mp can make for nice prints, you can still see the difference. I can tell you from personal experience that even on an A4 print I can see the difference between 24 and 60mp.
@@ChrisThe1 And yet cadburys ran an advertising campaign with 8ft bus stop prints from a 26mp X-T3… but rando on TH-cam ‘can tell the difference at A4’
Seems legit
@@djstuc clearly "randos on youtube" don't understand billboards. They usually have as low as 2mp. They are far from a standard of quality. This is precisely what pisses me off about the "image quality doesn't matter" argument. Photography doesn't matter. You don't need a camera; you don't need to take pictures. It's all for fun. If people enjoy their pictures with better resolution, let them. You don't have a single good reason to shit on other's hobbies.
@@ChrisThe1 I said bus stop print, viewed close up from street level, seems your reading comprehension skills are about as good as your ability to understand print quality.
I don’t know if this is because I watch everyone, or if you have covered this topic multiple times, but I’m tired of hearing this. While it is important to make this point, I think you’re better off making more entertaining content by using a lower quality camera and showing your results. Use a camera that is not modern interchangeable lens mirrorless system, and instead something like a point and shoot. Tom Calton does this all the time, (though I wish he wouldn’t only use Sonys) and it’s really fun and educational.
First!!
4:54 been rocking a canon eos rebel t5 kit lens since it came out, been thru hell and back with it but I think it’s time to upgrade it lmfao
For photos cameras havent changed that much in terms of quality. But for video, the changes are huge. Almost every camera can shoot 4k now. That wasnt the case like 10 years ago.
So gear matters more for filmmakers I guess.