The Point of Diminished Returns for Photography

This video I look at the age of performance and technology. How much more do we need for photography, wildlife or other?

Subscribe for editing tips and behind-the-scenes videos as well as community contests and free giveaways:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT FAVORITE GEAR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shopping for any of these brands? Use these links:

[cliftonwhittaker]

I'm 82 years old and not getting around well enough to be as active in my two hind legs as I would like to be. I have a D850 that filled all the quality and needs I thought I wanted, but, after a lot of hesitation, I went ahead and bought a Z8 with lens adapter. I'm so glad I did! The AI focus and the single point focus and bird's eye recognition along with the superb auto ISO have made using this camera a pure joy. I might not get to use it for very long but the satisfaction with what time I have spent with has made it worth the purchase. Besides, I took it out of the kids' inheritance. Most likely this is my last one but like Ansel Adams said when he was folding it up, I regret that my career is ending on the brink of so many great developments (or words to that effect).

[JeffandLeslie]

I spent 36 years in the IT industry. I've seen this cycle play out over and over. When some new technology comes out we see a period of rapid advancements then we go through a plateau where any improvements are small and incremental with limited real-world impact. Then, some disruptive technology or development will come along and we will see a period of rapid and major improvements before the next plateau is reached. SLR was a new tech, once it plateaued and became mature to the point there was not a lot of improvements, Digital SLR came along. We had a period of rapid advancement and improvement until we hit a plateau then Mirrorless came along and we're nearing the end of the rapid improvements and getting ever closer to the plateau stage. There will be a new disruptive technology or advancement in the future that will create the rush to rapid advancement. It is a cycle that happens in technology fields and, cameras are, indeed, a technology device.

[Cotictimmy]

The original D3 is still a pretty awesome and very usable camera. I tried the Z6, & was not all that impressed, so I sold it again & continued using my D3S & D3X.

[BobDiaz]

We have reached a point where Moore's Law is starting to slow down. Improvements will come, but not as fast as before. This impacts what future versions of the cameras can do. So, no surprise that the next generation of cameras aren't as big a jump as we've seen in the past.

[TimLaytonDarkroomDiary]

I specialize in ultra large format analog photography and my cameras are all based on 19th century technology. I buy a camera and some lenses and I never need to upgrade for my entire life. That isn't realistic for photographers who want or need digital gear, but it is a point to note that not every photographer wants or needs any improvements. All of my workflows are based on the 1830s to 1850s discoveries. I use a digital camera to shoot behind-the-scenes videos and photos of my darkroom and fieldwork, so I don't think I will buy a new camera until mine is broken. I am using a Canon R6II for that work. I enjoyed the video.

[vzshadow]

Interesting video. I have to say that my Z8 does everything I wanted to do and I really can’t think of anything more than I want from my camera

[arunphillips]

Personally speaking I'm loving the images I get from my 16 year old Nikon D300, absolutely amazing images...yes even in 2024!

[stevebarnett]

I think there’s an argument that processing software updates (Photoshop etc) can keep cameras ‘alive’ longer than ever before and beyond the next camera update.

[EricLouisYoung]

After the Z9 and R5 level of camera the only improvements that can come are in dynamic range and video capabilities.

[blisteringbooks]

Most of the time I am happy with a DSLR, in many ways mirrorless is like the crop sensor film cameras, a gimmick to sell something new. I went to mirrorless mainly for eye tracking, maybe flip screen for low level, I rarely use 10fps. As a pro Canon shooter of 50 yrs I could be tempted by the R5ii for improved autofocus and precapture, but as you said, the megapixel race seems to have stalled. Possibly because of manipulating files in post. Remember that when the Canon R1 rumours began it was going to have a 100mp sensor? You can already notice how sensors outperform lenses, even with a 7Dii. I have a 400mm f2.8[non IS] and apart from the weight there is probably little improvement in IQ, any noticable lens improvements are going to come at a cost.

[richandgem]

Totally agree with your thoughts on this subject. My partner and I recently both got Nikon Z 8's and after using them awhile both came to the same conclusion. In a nutshell, what more could we possibly ever need from a body.

[billlemmon]

I agree that autofocus is one area that could use some improvement, but I would like to see a new body that is not for video but for the still photographer. If I shoot video I use my phone, I'd like to see a med priced mirrorless body with good autofocus and a manual only mode that could be priced around 1200 dollars

[VinceMaidens]

I will always go and get the new one as you mentioned, I am skipping the R1 for the same reasons you mentioned. Had they put the R52 in the R3 body and called it the R1 people would be pissing themselves and calling it a game changer for probodies.

[jimbruton]

My take: Leapfrog, that's been my rule for years. I.E don't buy the next version (unless your business requires it), wait for the one after that. On cell phones, leapfrog 3 or 4 generations. You touched on it but one of the next advances will be the in camera software. For example have the camera automatically produce a multiple exposure or focus stack with the result be not several images to blend in post process, but deliver a processed in camera raw image that you can edit further without the blending. I do think exclusively building hybrids diminish technology improvements as it makes compromises for pricing reasons. "All in ones" are not the way to build camera technology. We need to have better choices whether you want a primarily stills camera (like me) or one that is more videocentric. Lastly, why are we limited to ASPC, full frame, and medium formats? I'd love to see a camera that has a sensor in between full frame and medium format. Disruptive technology will drive advancements we may as yet be aware.

[psoon]

Ergonomics and handling of my gear is paramount to me. Fancy features help for sure, but all of the gear that stay the longest with me are those that feel right in my hands with controls that are where I can find and operate without fumbling around for them.

[brandesd]

I'm still shooting a 20MP R6 so its a real struggle to get any keepers. 🙂. If Canon decides to make a decent version of the R7 I'll prolly buy it for fall migration on the ridge, but otherwise I'd rather spend my money on glass and travel

[CelebratingOutdoors]

Thank you for your thoughts. After thinking about the topic myself for awhile, I do feel there will be ways camera bodies will hopefully continue to expand to more closely mimick human vision. Perhaps concave sensors that present wide angle captures without distortions, dynamic ranges that make exposure stacking obsolete, depth of field feedback, 3D stereoscopics, etc

[mattebaloo]

I can imagine taking serial shots with different focus points with minute differences to get things in focus, especially fast moving objects. Also higher ISO can be improved. I can see improvements in speed of lenses, making the smaller with large apertures.

[ericvaughan]

I just wanted to chime in this subject, I think we have reached that point now that going forward camera upgrades are going to be minor mostly. But I have to talk about Canon flagship camera R1, really amazed at how many YouTube content creators really were disappointed with it. What is the most surprising is that they don't really understand who Canon designed that camera for. It was not wildlife, content creators, portrait, family or wedding photographers. That is what the R5 II was designed for. Canon's flagship has always been designed for a specific professional sports and fast action photographer, period. When has Canon ever made a really high resolution sensor on their flagship???? The photographer they made the R1 for DO NOT want or need 45MP, or camera that shoots120 frames per second. Imagine being professional shooting the olympics and after an event you forgot and left it on 40 frames per second and now you have over 5, 000 images to cull thru instead of maybe 1800-2500 images to go thru, pick the best 10, edit them and get them off to the editor in 15-20 minutes. Now imagine those are 45MP files, ain't happing. Anyone that doesn't understand or doesn't get this REALLY needs to watch the "Using the New Canon R1 & R5 Mark II At the Olympics with Jeff Cable" video, I found it really interesting and informative. The photographer they designed R1 for need three major things, speed (don't necessarily mean frames per second) 20-40 FPS is plenty, best autofocus that will increase their hit rate of keepers and IQ and R1 covers all those in spades. They need files that they can get downloaded and sent to editors as quickly as possible and that is why 45MP isn't a welcome feature. Canon might have different philosophy for a flagship camera than other brands, but that doesn't make it wrong or right, just different. But you're all initialed to your opinion, so happy shooting. I do have one question about Nikon, how do you like a High end camera for wildlife that Pre Capture is JPEG only, in most cases make is pretty much useless. After using my R5 II with Pre Burst RAW and how well it works, that is a feature now I couldn't live without. To me that is one of best new features any camera has came out with in past few years, even than improvements in Autofocus. I'm sure the next Z8 II or Z9II will have it, that alone would be worth the upgrade. I was really surprised their newly released Z6III is JPEG only as well.

[stevelink]

Thank you for this thought-provoking video! As a landscape, wildlife and product photographer with a Z8 and Z7, I'm pretty satisfied with the image quality I achieve with these bodies and the Nikkor S optics. That said, since I often print quite large (30" x 40" and up), I've always been curious as to how much sharpness and detail I would retain/see in those prints if my files were from a 100MP medium format system. If I only printed book size or published to social media, then of course my FF system would be more than sufficient.