To crop or not to crop? I went through a stage of loving the cropping, I would see many images within images, btw even if you don’t crop, you are still in fact cropping as the image is just a small crop of the wider vision available to the eye. However I have gone right off the idea of cropping my images, now I prefer to get it right, just as I want it at the point of taking. Cropping reduces the resolution (especially when I’m still using a 10mp camera) which could be a problem if I wanted to print large, also with cropping I end up with odd sized images, which could also present a problem when printing and presenting your work.
It often amuses me when photographers talk about resolution, pixel count as if it’s the most important thing, when most hardly ever make prints, and just share their images online, so what does it matter? In fact when photographers start talking about equipment I often yawn and feel like walking away! My first dslr was a Canon 10D 6.3 mp and the A3 prints from it were very nice, it’s rare I print larger than A3 size. It was just a bit slow to use, I then got a 30D but the actual camera felt small in my hand even with the extra battery grip attached, so I got a Canon 40D slightly bigger and has a decent size and feel to it. The 40D is an old camera now, but I’m still using it together with some Canon and Sigma lenses.
I’ve been having thoughts of upgrading, maybe getting a 7D (I do like the idea of having a 100% viewfinder, as I enjoyed with my old 35mm film cameras, EOS 1N etc) or maybe a Canon 5D mk2 or 3, but then I would have to spend loads of money on lenses to take full advantage of the full frame sensor, expensive! Most of my lenses I have now are designed just for the crop sensor cameras. The 7D has the same size sensor as the 40D but with more pixels in it, probably a faster engine behind it too, but I always shoot in raw, so would I see much difference in the end image quality? And I don’t need video on it, I am into still images also I have a Lumix LX100 which shoots 4K video.
Some guy on instagram asked me what my “set up was” on one of my street portraits, the same image I have posted here, I said an old Canon 40D and an old Sigma lens, it’s a nice lens, light and compact too. I think he was a bit disappointed and was expecting something more high end, more expensive, he unfollowed me after I told him, Haha. People get too bogged down with the equipment and technical side, usually newbie’s, they think its all about the equipment! Off course we all enjoy the gear side to a certain extent, but the more experienced you become, the more you realize its simply a tool, and the 40D is a tool that doesn’t get in the way of making photos, and the image quality is more than adequate.
At the end of the day it’s about the image, the content, the framing etc, doesn’t really matter how you got there. Most cameras today will take decent quality images, I’m not the sort of photographer who would take a magnifying glass to a gallery with me to check out corner sharpness! who cares about that boring stuff in the real world? Think I will stick with what I’ve got for the time being, if money was no object I suppose I would be getting all kinds of equipment to play with, maybe a large format film view camera and a professional neg scanner, that would give you plenty of pixels! And the money I save I could spend on travelling and actually taking photos, rather then talking about equipment.
Btw, here’s an excellent review of the Canon 40D by a fellow photographer and blogger... Photographic Central Link
Heres a recent one taken with my Canon 40D & Sigma 18 - 50mm f2.8 (throughout the zoom) EX Lens, at the long end wide open @ f2.8 iso 400. I always shoot in raw, process in lightroom, maybe tweak a bit in photoshop if needed. Often I find they need little work on them from what comes out the camera.
