GEAR WARS: The Sensor Strikes Back

THE STAR Wars story couldn't be a better example of the age-old plot: the good guys against the bad guys. The white hats against the black hats. Canon against Nikon. Ironically enough, back in those days, most of the Canon lenses were white and the Nikons were black. If you are old like me, you probably shot 35mm Single Lens Reflex (SLR) cameras. During those years, I used to see arguments about "which one is better" all the time. Many of them were good natured, but sometimes it got down into the trenches. Then: grab some popcorn and sit back for the show. Almost always a dark comedy. 😏

I SHOT both over the years (though mostly Nikon). I never looked at them with a "one-is-better-than-the-other" attitude. In my toolbox, I have two hammers. One is the Estwing brand and the other is Stanley. I kind of favor the look and feel of my Estwing - but really, both have the identical function. They drive (and pull) nails. And both work just fine for the task. Perhaps an overly simplistic comparison, but I have done so purposely - hopefully to make a point. Probably the two "best seller" hammers. There are many others, though, that perform equally well.

There ain't no good guy; there ain't no bad guy . . . 

THESE DAYS the "Gear Wars," are no longer between best sellers Canon and Nikon (in the mirrorless camera world the two best sellers are now Sony and Canon). Today the war has moved to a different battlefield: sensors. Still just as much a waste of time in my book, internet camera sites, blogs and social media pages/groups are often mired in arguments about whether certain M4/3 systems are as good or better than the so-called "full frame" (FF = 35mm equivalent) systems. There are, of course, other sensors that are smaller (1" and below - as in P&S cameras and smartphones), larger (so-called "medium format" which is - nonsensically - larger than "full frame"), and in between (the very popular APS-C sensors). The two major camps in the skirmish, though, appear to be the M4/3 against the FF.

TRYING TO keep my multiple metaphors under control, 😓 I want to repeat what I have harped on here before: (Dave Mason said it better than I can): There ain't no good guy; there ain't no bad guy, there's only you and me and we just disgree. As they always have been and always will be, these things are just tools!

The operative word here is compromise

THE RIGHT tool for the job, was something my dad and grandfather (both consummate craftsmen and engineers) repeated time and again to me over my youthful years (think of that time when you grabbed a butter knife from the kitchen to unscrew something). Sometimes there is more than one tool for the job. Sometimes there is only one. Surely there are poorly-made copies and brands out there, but when we are talking about the primary camera market, for the most part they are of equivalent quality manufacture. Because of that, the brand of screwdriver doesn't  matter as much as some of us might think it does. They aren't "better or worse." They are just different.

The two major camps in the skirmish . . . appear to be the M4/3 against the FF

I AM not for a moment saying there aren't differences, or that those differences are useless and unimportant. I am saying that we place an inordinantly heavy emphasis on them. Let me stay with the tool example for a bit. Same toolbox, different drawer. I have two full sets of ratchet drive socket wrenches (full disclosure: I actually have several more sets). One is 1/4 inch drive and one is 1/2 inch drive. There are many of the same size sockets for both drives. In that way, they both work (mostly) equally well for the job of tightening or loosening hex-head nuts and bolts. They are tools. There are also some larger sockets that are only 1/2 inch drive and some much smaller ones that are 1/4 inch drive. There are times when you need the larger one for more leverage and torque and times when the smaller one fits the space better. 

FOR THOSE not as into tools, you will probably have only one set. Much like choosing a single camera system, there are going to be compromises. As you can see from the above, sometimes one system will do things the other won't. The choice of a single system is going to be a compromise -something I also harp on here (for the tool-confused, there is also a 3/8 inch drive ratchet setup which is probably going to be the best compromise in most cases).

The right tool for the job

I ACKNOWLEDGE that we are talking about a sophisticated camera system costing thousands of dollars and not a mostly single purpose simple wrench or hammer. The oversimplification is my attempt to make a stark point. When it comes to a camera system, there are, of course, multiple functions that must be addressed. They vary from camera to camera, and it is the manufacturers, and not us, who decide which model has which features (I have often thought about how nice the now-ancient Gateway Computer model would be for cameras; where we pick our base model and then add or delete features we want or do not, ala carte). Unfortunately, that is not even slightly feasible. Instead the operative word here is compromise. When we look at the M4/3 system against the FF system, each is going to do things the other will not. I have talked in some detail about these differences in my series about image quality (Resolution, Diffraction, and Image Sharpness). I won't publish another "comparison" laundry list here. My primary point is that we buy camera systems for a variety of reasons. Some of them are well thought out and some aren't. I suggest we all look more toward the "well thought out" approach. What kind of photography will we be doing? Where will we be doing it (will airline or other baggage-dependent travel be in the mix)? What kinds of technology will we need? What will we be doing with the images once recorded (do we want to make/sell large, detailed prints, or sell our digital images to commercial third parties)? How much does size and weight matter to us?

FOR SOME of us, we just couldn't make the one-system compromise work for us. If you know me, or have read the "What's In My Bag," page here, you know that I shoot both FF and M4/3 systems, depending on some of the factors mentioned above. For travel that is not dedicated to photography, I carry and use the M4/3 system 99% of the time. For outings dedicated to photography (especially landscape stuff), I use the FF gear 99% of the time. I have a good friend and talented photographer in his own right, who has FF gear for shooting wildlife and "Medium Format" system for landscape. That is how we deal with too narrow a compromise. The key is that we have chosen these systems for thought out reasons, and do not care a bit that anyone else thinks their gear is "better." It's not. Its just different.