What Camera to Buy

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

Vyas,

It sounds to me like you might be involved in the manufacture of an automobile or automobile related product that you need to keep confidential until it's announced to the public. So on one hand, using a trusted employee such as yourself to photograph the product makes sense from the point of view of all those involved not having to worry about security breaches. But on the other hand, if you're wanting high-quality images then to be brutally honest, you just won't be able to do it yourself.

No disrespect, but I suspect that you're at a stage where you probably "don't know how much you don't know" yet; as others have pointed out, camera and lens selection is the least of your worries; lighting will be what makes or breaks it - but even then you still need to have a suitable location (not sure if you're needing in-studio or location at this stage) - and then it comes down to the right techniques. In many respects, it's a bit like asking "what heart-lung bypass machine would be best for me to use when I have a go at heart surgery on my boss at work because he doesn't want to check into a hospital".

My STRONG advice is to research and then engage a industry professional, under a signed NDA (non-disclosure agreement) (with appropriate penalties). Failing that, pop along to www.kelbytraining.com - sign up for a month - and take a look at the course on automotive photography from Tim Wallace; it'll be an excellent starting point for you.

Hope some of this helps.

Thanks a lot colin!! I think you truly understand my position and Appreciate your help . I'll take up the training, and do my best.

To answer few of your questions,

I'll be shooting outdoors at our test sight. So it will be under bright sunlight (you know how bright it is in the desert!!).
Regarding the minimum viewing distance, these prints would be viewed from about 7m and I'm not expected to give quality pics as that can be given by a professional. They just need an acceptable image quality.

In your previous post you mentioned about the relation between resolution of the source image and its min. viewing distance. If 7m, is my min. viewing distance, how do I calculate the resolution of the image needed? and can this resolution be set in any camera?

Also, please note that I'm in no hurry to print the pictures. and as I already mentioned, this is for the future (may be 1yr down the line ). I understand 1 year may not be enough, but I want to start and keep trying.


Vyas

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

After doing a bit of reading, I understood that I should first know what feature to look for in the camera I buy. I'll post this question in another thread, so other beginners like me also understand what features to look for in the camera they buy.

[Colin Southern]

Thanks a lot colin!! I think you truly understand my position and Appreciate your help . I'll take up the training, and do my best.

To answer few of your questions,

I'll be shooting outdoors at our test sight. So it will be under bright sunlight (you know how bright it is in the desert!!).
Regarding the minimum viewing distance, these prints would be viewed from about 7m and I'm not expected to give quality pics as that can be given by a professional. They just need an acceptable image quality.

In your previous post you mentioned about the relation between resolution of the source image and its min. viewing distance. If 7m, is my min. viewing distance, how do I calculate the resolution of the image needed? and can this resolution be set in any camera?

Also, please note that I'm in no hurry to print the pictures. and as I already mentioned, this is for the future (may be 1yr down the line ). I understand 1 year may not be enough, but I want to start and keep trying.


Vyas

You're very welcome Vyas.

Bright sunlight is horrible for car shots -- it produces hard shadows, and specular reflections that are likely to degrade image quality (by introducing flare). Best natural light to photograph under is what we call directional diffused light (think "overcast day, but with one area of the sky being brighter due to the dun being behind it).

In terms of resolution, for a given camera, it's really a moot point because the camera has a fixed number of pixels (unless you want to photograph the car in sections and electronically stitch the images together to make a higher resolution image). So if you can only capture a given number of pixels - and you need to print at a certain size - then "it is what it is". You can't create more pixels and you're not going to throw any away - so in essence it's a done deal. To put some number to that though, if you used a camera like the 36MP Nikon D800, you'd end up with (assuming no cropping) with 7424 pixels, spread across 78 inches - which will give you 94 dpi. If you were viewing a 94DPI image from 1 or 2 meters away then you'd be able to see a bit of degradation, but from 7m it'll be fine. In reality, correct sharpening will have a much bigger impact on final image quality when viewed at that distance. Does that make sense (sorry, it's a topic that seems to confuse a lot of people for some reason).

1 year will give you a lot of time to practice Tell me though, is it just car exteriors? Or are there also interiors?

[Colin Southern]

After doing a bit of reading, I understood that I should first know what feature to look for in the camera I buy. I'll post this question in another thread, so other beginners like me also understand what features to look for in the camera they buy.

The features aren't overly important because there is a HUGE overlap in features from many cameras that'll do what you want. In this case - because of the size you want to print at the distance you want to view it, "more megapixels" will help more than "less megapixels", but that's pretty much the least of your worries - things like lighting, lenses, tripods, colour calibration equipment, processing software etc are all things you're going to need to consider as well.

My suggestion would be to do some of the Kelby Training courses first - then come back for some more advice then, when you have a better feel for it.

[Black Pearl]

Vyas

I know much of what has been posted has been negative (I have posted along those line too) but we are trying to help. You need to understand that the camera is the least important decision you are going to have to make and if you're now going off looking for certain features I feel you are still looking in the wrong place to get your project off the ground.

I'll assume you are going to be taking pictures of stationary objects, under controlled conditions or as much as shooting outdoors allows control. You will have time available and basics like a tripod available. That assumed your camera becomes little more than a light tight box with a recording device in the back. The sensor will be relatively important but what else do you need? Auto focus performance, frame rate, metering patterns, white balance accuracy, shooting modes...the list is endless...don't matter as you are going to have the camera sitting still, with the focus locked. The metering is going to be external and many other parameters will have been set before you take a shot.

My advice - forget about the camera for now and go off to start some research about lighting equipment including, reflectors, modifiers, then filters for the front of the lens, exposure meters, software, lenses themselves. In other words everything else you are gong to need to learn about before you take a shot.

Edit: Colin and I posted at the same time

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

You're very welcome Vyas.

Bright sunlight is horrible for car shots -- it produces hard shadows, and specular reflections that are likely to degrade image quality (by introducing flare). Best natural light to photograph under is what we call directional diffused light (think "overcast day, but with one area of the sky being brighter due to the dun being behind it).

In terms of resolution, for a given camera, it's really a moot point because the camera has a fixed number of pixels (unless you want to photograph the car in sections and electronically stitch the images together to make a higher resolution image). So if you can only capture a given number of pixels - and you need to print at a certain size - then "it is what it is". You can't create more pixels and you're not going to throw any away - so in essence it's a done deal. To put some number to that though, if you used a camera like the 36MP Nikon D800, you'd end up with (assuming no cropping) with 7424 pixels, spread across 78 inches - which will give you 94 dpi. If you were viewing a 94DPI image from 1 or 2 meters away then you'd be able to see a bit of degradation, but from 7m it'll be fine. In reality, correct sharpening will have a much bigger impact on final image quality when viewed at that distance. Does that make sense (sorry, it's a topic that seems to confuse a lot of people for some reason).

1 year will give you a lot of time to practice Tell me though, is it just car exteriors? Or are there also interiors?

Colin,

My mouth is zipped, but I can tell you this much..that I'll not be shooting shiny cars. I'm sorry, I cannot give in more details

I had a word with the printing people, and it seems they need 150 DPI. I know I can up the dpi in photoshop, but how do I achieve 150 dpi from the camera? If I digitally stitch a couple of photos, will I achieve 150dpi? or is there any other way?

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

Vyas

I know much of what has been posted has been negative (I have posted along those line too) but we are trying to help. You need to understand that the camera is the least important decision you are going to have to make and if you're now going off looking for certain features I feel you are still looking in the wrong place to get your project off the ground.

I'll assume you are going to be taking pictures of stationary objects, under controlled conditions or as much as shooting outdoors allows control. You will have time available and basics like a tripod available. That assumed your camera becomes little more than a light tight box with a recording device in the back. The sensor will be relatively important but what else do you need? Auto focus performance, frame rate, metering patterns, white balance accuracy, shooting modes...the list is endless...don't matter as you are going to have the camera sitting still, with the focus locked. The metering is going to be external and many other parameters will have been set before you take a shot.

My advice - forget about the camera for now and go off to start some research about lighting equipment including, reflectors, modifiers, then filters for the front of the lens, exposure meters, software, lenses themselves. In other words everything else you are gong to need to learn about before you take a shot.

Edit: Colin and I posted at the same time

I agree 100% to whatever you said robin. But the reason I'm insisting on device is because my company is asking for the device to be purchased. Now I understand the device doesn't matter for now. So its wise to ask my company to wait before they get anything.
I'll first take the training suggested by colin, and with further reading and practice, I'm confident I'll understand the art of photography better.

[Colin Southern]

Colin,

My mouth is zipped, but I can tell you this much..that I'll not be shooting shiny cars. I'm sorry, I cannot give in more details

Sounds intriguing. If it's a stealth car, you might need some tips from the photographer who took this

I had a word with the printing people, and it seems they need 150 DPI. I know I can up the dpi in photoshop, but how do I achieve 150 dpi from the camera? If I digitally stitch a couple of photos, will I achieve 150dpi? or is there any other way?

I have a name for my pain ... it's printers insisting on "certain DPI". Bottom line is that most of the time, they don't understand what it is that they're asking, but the (short) answer is "just up-sample it in Photoshop to 150DPI and they'll never know the difference". I used to come across this all the time -- in the end it was quicker to resample than it was to try and educate them. Yes, they may "need" 150 DPI, but if they really understood what it meant, they'd just up-sample images to make them conform themselves rather than complaining to the photographer about it.

It also depends on the type of print process involved; if it's coming off of a wide-format inkjet printer (eg Epson stylus pro 9800) then it doesn't matter a damn what the DPI is as the printer will automatically upsample it to around 1280 dpi anyway).

How many posters are going to be printed?

[BUGSBUNNYBOSS]

How many posters are going to be printed?

According my judgement, 20 posters per year.

[ajohnw]

Colin is correct about up sampling but the viability of that depends on the detail in the shot. Your fortunate that they don't want 300 DPI. The problem with offering a solution to your problems is that a lot depends on what you are photographing. You may find the printers want raw files as well and that they do the adjustments.

I worked for the automotive industry and have organised photo's taken by myself on one occasion and by pro's on others. The ones I took were an information gathering exercise and finished up being examined with a magnifying glass. Fortunately they were up to it. The pro's always turned up with gear that to me was severely over the top. The most extreme case of that was in film days. The pro delivered contact prints off a 10x8in plate camera. I asked him why and the answer was that he could never be sure what they might eventually want to do with the shot. Sounds strange but in a sense he is correct in other ways, a lot of the cost is his time and when some one wants shots on products they are inevitably needed in a hurry.

My advice would be to hire a camera initially and take some shots and view them on a PC screen - off hand I can't remember what the actual dpi of a screen is but lets say 100. If it looks fine at that it will be ok at 150 but will be proportionally smaller. Next problem is lenses but there is a need for some idea of the size of items you are going to shoot even to the extent of apparent size and depth at ideal angles. This is an important aspect.

The simplest answer to lighting is to shoot out doors in diffuse light - no direct sunlight. That can mean slow shutter speeds so a tripod and remote release are needed. Flash can be an alternative but it often means shooting only at angles where there are no reflections back into the camera so hire a flash gun as well. Setting up artificial lighting is almost an art form. The skill doesn't come easily. Even expensive pro's will shoot product outside if they can and it's suitable.

A couple of shots relating to detail. This one on my 27in monitor comes out with a diagonal of around 50 odd inches. The monitor is one of the standard ones with the higher pixel count. If it was one of the lower pixel count ones it would be bigger and probably wouldn't look ok unless viewed from further away. This was taken with a 12mp 4/3 sensor crop factor of 2. Detail levels are not a problem. PP could be better.

http://backup.cambridgeincolour.com/...98480/original

In my view that could be printed with getting on for a 50in diagonal. Certainly at 150 dpi. The link goes to a shot and that will go full sized if clicked on.

At the other end of the scale I have printed this at A4 at 600dpi and if anything it looses detail. This one is a crop taken with a 2:1 reproduction ratio onto the sensor. I practice the sensor has failed to capture all of the detail as well. That too can be a problem on some items in both respects - min print size and sensor/lens capabilities. The same situation can crop up in none macro shots.

http://backup.cambridgeincolour.com/...82543/original

Then comes what lens but the size of the items come into that and the available space in some cases.

Last but not least - who does the post processing.

Whoops forgot back grounds. There was a projection system about years ago that took care of that and the shots were taken through it with both images in focus.

John
-

[Colin Southern]

According my judgement, 20 posters per year.

Cool - thanks for that.

For a low number like that, just get them printed on a wide format inkjet - it'll up-sample to its native resolution (usually 1440 dpi or higher) - source resolution doesn't need to be any particular number.

[Andrew76]

For a low number like that, just get them printed on a wide format inkjet - it'll up-sample to its native resolution (usually 1440 dpi or higher) - source resolution doesn't need to be any particular number.

One of my employees popped into my shop today to shoot the breeze. He's a commercial printer repair fellow. Most of his work comes from Ricoh, Epson, and Canon machines. He explained all of this dpi, and up-sampling, and dithering, and native resolution to me today.

Now I understand.

[Colin Southern]

One of my employees popped into my shop today to shoot the breeze.

A lot of employees do that. Pity they don't come into the shop to work

He's a commercial printer repair fellow. Most of his work comes from Ricoh, Epson, and Canon machines. He explained all of this dpi, and up-sampling, and dithering, and native resolution to me today.

Ask him to explain it to the people who use them while he's at it!

[Inkanyezi]

Maybe we should give a few words of comfort about camera/sensor size and being a beginner.

There is absolutely no difference when it comes to handling the larger format, more "professional" camera. It behaves exactly like the smaller one, the only differences that it is slightly bigger, and that due to larger lenses, its depth of field is generally more shallow. So there's no reason to go for a smaller sensor model, thinking of later upgrading to a bigger one. You can handle the professional camera if you can handle the crop sensor model.

The narrower depth of field, is often used to make the main subject in an image "pop", by keeping the background a bit diffuse.

If I should get a camera for this type of work, and if the 24x36 format is sufficient, I.d go for Sony α7, or if a larger format would be preferred, I'd think of any of the medium format cameras. Other equipment needed would be at least a sturdy tripod and preferably large reflectors and diffusers to control the light upon the subject. With such large subjects, wind could be a major problem then, but often buildings can be used as reflectors. What lenses to use is a matter of image style. Wide angle accentuates perspective, while longer lenses holds perspective back. I think I would have one "normal" lens and a larger one, both with large aperture, if the images would not be taken from close distance to exaggerate perspective, in which case a wide angle would be needed.

So if there's consensus about getting a FF camera, go for it. Which brand is not overly important; my preference is a mirror-free system, but there are of course other preferences in the crowd. They give about the same image quality, and the lenses you need are available for any system.

[Black Pearl]

A Sony A7?

Seriously?

Over something like a Nikon D800?

Because?

[Andrew76]

A lot of employees do that. Pity they don't come into the shop to work



Ask him to explain it to the people who use them while he's at it!

In his defense, he did actually help me out, and if we're talking photography, I won't give him a hard time!

And, he did express his disgust in the way many of his customers don't understand how to use what they own... Some pretty crazy stories - even things I know about!

[Colin Southern]

A Sony A7?

Seriously?

Over something like a Nikon D800?

Because?

It's a nice enough camera, but for this particular project, more MP is going to be the biggest factor -- and for that (and this comes from a Canon man!), you just can't beat the D800 @ 36MP -v- 24 for the Sony A7.

[shreds]

I have just read through all the posts here, an interesting exercise. A few thoughts to add:-

Vyas

Clearly I think we all respect the confidentiality of the matter.

There are some excellent comments here nevertheless. Due to the nature of the project are you going to be allowed freedom of location, time of the shoot etc? Are you going to have assistants to help you? Hold reflectors etc? Set up lighting? Are you going to be expected to produce the image inc. post production to hand to the printers?

You mention taking 'landscape shots' but also say that you will be generally shooting at 5m (with flexibility). I would have considered 5m relatively close for a 'landscape shot' of the object.

Assuming your location is close to your stated location, do avoid mid day as Colin says, a very early morning or late evening may produce better light for you to shoot in. Even consider shooting at night, where you can bring in lighting and control the situation more, for a dramatically different take!

Phase One medium format cameras were mentioned. Yes they cost, but they can be hired, as can other hi-end cameras like Hasselblads' for specific projects. Many vehicle manufacturers 'professionals' will be using such equipment, or top of the range Canon or Nikon stuff.

Not that it makes a better photo, but it will resolve some of the other issues by creating decent sized image files at the outset. Learning how to use such cameras until they become second nature is also part of the learning process is another important part of the equation. And we are all still 'learning,' no one knows everything! (Just some already know more than others).

I would certainly listen to the advice of Colin and Robin who are industry insiders, along with a number of other quality posters. (Sorry I can't mention them all).

Phase One do residential 'PODAS' workshops around the world http://www.phaseone.com/en/workshops/podas.aspx where you are loaned a camera for the duration. They are not cheap, but at least you get very small groups and hands on tuition with the Phase One camera and you still have not had to spend the money on purchase. Leasing is often advantageous to companies from a tax perspective. (And I wish someone had paid for my learning and offered my a great camera years ago!)

Obviously all the 'quality' posts here regards lighting and other equipment, are also crucial in getting the product shots you want.

Just bear in mind that you can set yourself on that learning track (Kelby being good to listen to) and there is a lot to learn. Twelve months will fly by!

I just hope your employers are happy for you to be immersed in photography learning for the next year!!

[Inkanyezi]

A Sony A7?

Seriously?

Over something like a Nikon D800?

Because?

We need not go into that. Different people might have different preferences, and YMMV.
I think a discussion over preferences might go astray from the subject at hand.

The important matters are other than the camera body one will choose.

[Colin Southern]

We need not go into that. Different people might have different preferences, and YMMV.
I think a discussion over preferences might go astray from the subject at hand.

Sorry, but I'm with Robin on this one. The OP has stated what his needs are ... "to produce a print 1m high by 2m wide, viewable at 7m". That's doable with an DSLR, but definitely into the category of more pixels is better (hence the reason I wouldn't even suggest a 5D3).

A D800 is going to give him 94 DPI - the Sony A7 only 76 DPI. 76 DPI is getting pretty marginal.