"[Brand X has] reached the limit of what is sensible, in terms of megapixels on an APS-C sensor. … Even the sharpest primes at optimal apertures cannot (at least away from the center of the frame) satisfy the [redacted] megapixel sensors hunger for resolution. Considering the disadvantages that come with higher pixel densities such as diffraction issues, increased sensitivity towards camera shake, reduced dynamic range, reduced high ISO performance and the need to store, move and process larger amounts of data, one could be forgiven for coming to the conclusion that at this point the megapixel race should probably stop."
That's what DPReview had to say about the Canon 50D back in October of 2008. It seems quaint now that we were concerned about the quality ramifications of stepping up from ten to fifteen megapixels, which gives that old Canon about the same pixel density as my D800, and far less than any smaller-sensor camera currently on the market.* But the reality is that, when normalized down to a lower resolution, the 50D really didn't provide all that much of a performance improvement over the previous generation.
That's unlike the move from the Nikon D3100 to D3200, or D700 to D800, both of which provide a real step up from their predecessors. It's not nearly as revolutionary as the numbers – or marketing campaigns – suggest, but these things never are.
Looking back at DPreview's list of megapixel evils, two of them – reduced dynamic range, worse high-iso performance – have been resolved by improving technology. Diffraction and camera shake are false issues, as the higher resolution still give still an overall improvement, even if it's not as great as it could be. My D800 can show problems that I wouldn't have seen before, but it's also able to do a better job than any other camera I've owned whenever I need it too. This is a fundamental shift: we no longer have any reason to be afraid of resolution when we're working with something bigger than a point-and-shoot's sensor.
And reading about the weighty burden of "data storage and processing" of 20MB raw files – from SLR photography's pre-video era – is somewhat charming.
Old camera reviews are refreshing. It's not just a record of where we've been, it's also a hint of what today's greatest devices will look like a few years from now. There's no better reminder to have fun with what I have and not get overly caught up the hardware details – but I realize that that's an easy attitude to have when I already own a D800.
DPReview's full conclusion about the Canon 50D is here.
*Except for Nikon's 12Mpx D300s, which still remains available to order in Canada, but only a complete camera geek would ever think of that one.
Comments, questions, thoughts? You can find me on Twitter or via e-mail.
