Image quality and cameras

[Marcin Sadurski]

Hello

I have been using Pentax SLR APSC cameras for years. I used to sell 5-8 pics per year here on Alamy. A couple of years ago I bought MFT Lumix GM5 (as a second camera). The pics pass the QC with no problems but after these two years I realized I didn't sell a single Lumix GM5 pic.

[Robert M Estall]

With less than 1000 images it's hard to find useful statistics. If your Pentax images are the bigger section I might take a guess that your Lumix images might be only a couple of hundred at most. It's a pity none have sold yet, but the number is too low to make any real conclusions. My portfolio is probably 75% scanned transparencies, the other 25% shot on a Pentax K-5. The Pentax shots do sell, but its down to the usefulness of the photos and little to do with which camera was used. 

[Rudix]

1 hour ago, Robert M Estall said:

With less than 1000 images it's hard to find useful statistics. If your Pentax images are the bigger section I might take a guess that your Lumix images might be only a couple of hundred at most. It's a pity none have sold yet, but the number is too low to make any real conclusions. My portfolio is probably 75% scanned transparencies, the other 25% shot on a Pentax K-5. The Pentax shots do sell, but its down to the usefulness of the photos and little to do with which camera was used. 

I agree, the sample is to small to draw meaningful statistics from it.

 

I am sure most buyers would not know the difference between the quality of the photos of the 2 cameras. You can produce great photos with almost any camera, it is only when conditions (like light, contrast and action/motion) are not ideal that the better camera will provide you with better images and more "keepers", and it will be easier to produce a good photo.

 

Edit: It is also worth mentioning that in most cases the lens is more important than the actual camera when it comes to image quality. 

[KevinS]

I was a full time pro back before digital, and could usually tell when a printed piece was from film bigger than 35mm. Wanting that quality, I dabbled in the bigger film. Now with digital I'm sticking with full frame, for now. As far as selling, I wonder if a buyer can visually discern any difference at all in the preview size. Probably not. Just as important, how often does a return happen because the buyer is disappointed in the file? I think this probably does happen, especially with Alamy pursuing the crowdsourcing model. 

[Bryan]

7 minutes ago, KevinS said:

. As far as selling, I wonder if a buyer can visually discern any difference at all in the preview size. Probably not. Just as important, how often does a return happen because the buyer is disappointed in the file? I think this probably does happen, especially with Alamy pursuing the crowdsourcing model. 

 

In my experience most refunds are due to the customer wanting a different deal, might be a lower price or maybe just a different date etc.

 

I've photos here from scans, both FF digital and APS-C sensors. I can't say that I notice any particular trend re sales.  True my highest earning sale was taken with a FF Canon 5D mk1, but my second highest was using a much higher resolution crop frame camera. 

 

Many sales are for low resolution newspaper related web use, when virtually any camera will do (assuming it gets through QC!). Occasionally I've seen Google Earth cited as the source, and, generally, the IQ is then appalling.

 

I don't think that you need to invest in FF kit in order to sell on Alamy.

[phomme]

Most of my photos  are shot with a Canon 1D MK IV, which is not a full frame camera. The rest is done with my 7D, not a full frame either. Quality wise I prefer my images done with my 1D, but here on alamy I sell nearly as many images done with my 7D as with my 1D.

 

A couple years back alamy had around 70 million images available, today they are up to 155 million. These figures probably have more to do with your low sales than your camera's sensor size.

[KevinS]

38 minutes ago, Bryan said:

I don't think that you need to invest in FF kit in order to sell on Alamy.

Totally agree, but I still shoot for high image quality in case it's an issue with a customer (I have very few newspaper sales). Some local customers of mine do need good files for calendars and DPS, hence the 6D with good glass and RX100 once in a while.

 

22 minutes ago, phomme said:

A couple years back alamy had around 70 million images available, today they are up to 155 million. These figures probably have more to do with your low sales than your camera's sensor size.

Best answer for OP

[MDM]

2 hours ago, Rudix said:

 

Edit: It is also worth mentioning that in most cases the lens is more important than the actual camera when it comes to image quality. 

 

That used to be the case in the days of film but is far from the truth now. The sensor and lens are equally important in determing image quality and I'm not sure how one could separate them.

[Rudix]

54 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

That used to be the case in the days of film but is far from the truth now. The sensor and lens are equally important in determing image quality and I'm not sure how one could separate them.

I don't fully agree, I would rather have an average sensor with good glass than a great sensor with bad glass.

 

But I do agree that you at least need a decent sensor, and then add the best glass you can afford. The difference between modern sensors are small compared to the difference in modern glass, there is some real junk lenses out there, but very few really bad sensors (talking dSLR and mirrorless, not point & shoot).

A lot of the "sensor wars" you read about on the web is based on differences that is not easy to see unless you really look at pixel level or test in the lab. That is as long as you compare size with size, if you compare 4/3 with AP-C with FF with MF, all using top glass, you can see the difference, especially if you open the image at 100%.

[Chuck Nacke]

RE: sensors and file size.  Of my small number of images on Alamy, my most licensed image was shot with a KODAK / NIKON DCS 620 at 1,600 ISO.

Camera is long gone, but it was a great 2.1MP DSLR in its day.

 

Just to add, Great glass on a poor sensor is a waste of time as is a Great sensor with poor glass.  This is true more than ever now with DSLR's

I love my NIKON D800's

[Dave Richards]

My first DSLR was a Nikon D90 with 18-105 kit zoom and this is the kit I used when first starting to submit images to Alamy. I subsequently acquired a D610 full frame and the ''holy trinity'' of the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 lenses (took a few years of hard saving, but should last a lifetime).

I continue to use both cameras for Alamy submissions. The D90 still a good camera and more so when used with those lenses..

It isn't necessarily the kit that sells the picture, the picture sells itself if it's what the customer wants.

[Mark Baigent]

The camera is not the issue, you need to look at images in adverts, magazines etc and shoot what people want to buy.
Try picking a theme such as "bullied, bully, bullying" then make images that show that subject. 

We have all gone through the stage where we shoot what we want to rather than what is wanted. Research the market.

Good luck

[TABan]

My Alamy portfolio includes images shot with full-frame Canons, APS-C Canons, a Canon G10, a Sony RX100 and now two Lumix GX85(80)s . Images from every one of them have licensed, most recently one from a GX85 for a commercial poster.