• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Diminishing returns in photography

Diminishing returns in photography

March 4, 2024 JimK 6 Comments

In many fields of endeavor and enjoyment as you spend more and more money, you get a smaller and smaller perceptual improvement per dollar.

You can buy a decent bottle of wine for 20 bucks. Picked carefully, you can serve it to knowledgeable friends and get few complaints. You could could spring for a 40-dollar bottle, and, again, chosen carefully, you’d get better wine. Up the ante to 60 clams, and the wine gets better, but the difference is not as great as the delta between 20 and 40 dollars. Keep going. When you get to $2000 a bottle, the improvement over a $1000 wine comes down to a matter of taste, even among wine experts.

You can get a decent television for $500. If you spend $1000 for one with the same size screen, it’ll be better, if you choose wisely. Spend $2000, and the difference will be smaller. Double that, and it’s smaller yet. Spring for an 8000-dollar set, and you’ll have to look closely to see the difference between it and the $4K one.

You can get an OK hifi for $1000. Double that, and it’ll be better. But the difference between a $60,000 setup and a $120,000 one will be smaller.

This is true in buying art, for sure.

And yet…

The aficionados in these fields will sometimes go on and on about the differences between purchases at the very highest end of their field. They will debate endlessly about them, and if you happen across a conversation — especially an Internet conversation — among those folk you will think there’s an immense difference. But if you’re ever lucky enough to drink a glass of ’61 Cheval Blanc, 2012  Romanée-Conti, or ’82 Petrus, you’ll be hard pressed to say much beside, “I’d like a refill of any of them.”

It’s the same with cameras, and it’s getting to be more and more the same as the CMOS sensor technology improves and the processor power continues to increase.

Compared to many serious cameras of yesteryear, the iPhone 15 takes pretty great pictures. M43 is better, APS-C is better than that, FF is better than that. For pure image quality, medium format is even better, but MF cameras can’t do some things that the newest FF cameras do with ease. As time goes by, cameras of all formats get better. Yet we don’t have more wall space, and, cataract surgery excepted, our eyes aren’t improving with time. So the perceptual differences grow smaller and smaller.

But that’s not a sentiment that gets a lot of digital ink these days, especially on the camera forums.

The Last Word

← Hasselblad X2D shutter latency Nikon 135 Plena OOF PSFs →

Comments

  1. Eugene says

    March 6, 2024 at 12:46 am

    What in your opinion offers the best compromise in acceptable quality, size & weight, features and capability among the different sensor formats if one is starting out as an enthusiast with an interest in every genre of photography eg. Sports action, architecture, portrait, macro? Thanks for your thoughtful tests and reviews.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      March 6, 2024 at 6:58 am

      24x36mm.

      Reply
      • Eugene says

        March 6, 2024 at 10:02 pm

        Ah thanks. So don’t mind my next question – would the brand you have in mind have an “L…GmbH” for that format? Or should I look elsewhere?

        Btw, you hve far more hands on factual tests with high spec equipment than ‘quack’ reviewers, that’s why I tap on your findings/conclusions. Thanks in advance.

        Reply
        • JimK says

          March 7, 2024 at 3:11 am

          I have recent, good experiences with Nikon Z, Sony a7Rx systems. I think either would be a good choice. I have not used Canon gear recently.

          Reply
  2. Eugene says

    March 7, 2024 at 3:38 am

    I would take a 2nd look into Nikon but lenses with z mount is pretty much barred from 3rd parties (except Tamron) at the moment compared to the Sony ecosystem.
    Hoping you will have a post in the near future about the pros n cons of current brands with full frame models.
    Thanks so much for your replies.

    Reply
    • Gilnumen says

      March 10, 2024 at 9:54 pm

      try ETZ(E mount to Z mount) adaptors

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.