Travel Photography Page 2 – Trade-offs

However obvious it may be that you must get up off your couch and go somewhere if you expect to have great travel photos, this reminder is really intended for your actual trip.  There is no such thing as bad weather if photography is treated as an end in itself, as one of the reasons to travel.  It’s good to have a quest, and just the desire to go out and find a memorable image is a great motivator to make the most of the time you have – in a place you may never see again.

Scotland Isle of Mull Rainy Day

Scotland - Isle of Mull - Rainy Day

Now that you are committed to having your camera with you at all times, come rain or shine, with fully charged batteries and spare memory, it may be time to review your equipment decision.  The choice to use a small automatic digital camera is not without consequence, and may not be the best choice if you don’t mind carrying additional gear.  (And you probably can’t be the next Ansel Adams using any digital camera.)

It is often assumed that an image which is intended to be used online will be so limited by the display resolution that the sharpness and detail of the original photo is not very important.  As the Grand Teton comparison on the previous page demonstrates, the sharper and more detailed the original, the better the image will look (on all but the smallest monitors) – regardless of the loss from the digital conversion and display.  So, sorry, but having your cell phone with you will not satisfy the imperative to always have your camera, though we may get there someday.

It is also often assumed that the sharpness and detail a camera can deliver is determined by its pixel count.  The number of pixels which a camera can store is definitely relevant to its ability to hold sharpness as an image is enlarged. If your ultimate intention is to be able to make high quality, large format color prints (over 8×10), a digital camera may work for you, but make sure you see some sample prints before you buy. The overall quality of a photo in its original dimensions is more dependent on factors related to the quality of the optics.  However, there are other advantages to having lots of pixels, so we’ll leave the optical quality question to the technicians and look at the practical importance of the most commonly quoted camera specification.

In 2008, we replaced our original Canon PowerShot S110, rated at 2 million “effective” pixels, with the Canon PowerShot SD950 at 12 million “megapixels”.

[Our first camera is still functioning, in the hands of a young lady in Kenya, which brings us to a brief rant on the single most important camera accessory:  THE WRIST STRAP.  If not for the wrist strap, we would be on our fifth or sixth PowerShot, with the rest at the bottom of various oceans and ravines.  The strap goes on as the camera is picked up – every time.]

Both Canon models offer a 3x optical zoom and an additional 3x “digital zoom”.  The optical zoom involves a physical adjustment of the lens and means that the full pixel capacity of the camera is committed to recording the image in the frame.  Digital zoom is the equivalent of enlarging an image (which you can just as well do with your software), and results in some loss of clarity.

I have read multi page articles on the subject of pixels and zooms, and ended up so confused that what I’ve said here is probably wrong.  So, it’s time to go to some examples and let the pictures do the talking.

We traveled with a group in Kenya, which provided the opportunity to compare shots of the same subject at a similar distance with different cameras.  In the samples below, we have giraffes captured with a Nikon D50 SLR with a 300ML zoom lens  (4.3x?) and 6 million effective pixels, up against the built in 3x zoom and 2 million pixels of the Canon PowerShot S110.

Stronger zoom and more pixels get you closer and sharper detail with a digital SLR, but the camera won't fit in your pocket. // Left: Nikon D50 // Right: Canon PowerShot S110

In the photo on the upper right, I was using the full 3x optical zoom, and both detail panels are at 400 percent “digital zoom” courtesy of Photoshop.  Continuing to zoom further on the lower right panel resulted in a complete breakup of the image into giraffe colored squares.

My friend with the Nikon had much better timing – catching one giraffe nudging another out of the way is the more interesting subject – but anyone seeing my photo alone would think it was a fairly nice shot of an African wildlife spotting.  During the years using the S110, I adapted to the capability of the camera and generally composed longer shots of wider scenes.

But…there was one shot in particular, captured by that Nikon in Kenya, that sat in the back of my mind and made me realize that a camera upgrade would be in our future.


Travel Photography Page 1

Page 2 – You Are Here

Page 3 – The Canon SD950

Page 4 – Tips

Page 5 – Software

Home

1 comment to Travel Photography Page 2 – Trade-offs

  • If you would like to comment on this page, please use the form directly below.

    To post a new topic, or submit your own photos, use the “Click here for Comments” link at the bottom of the page, and read the first post.

Leave a Reply