Does size matter?

Earlier today I received a request  from Getty Images for several of my photos for their 'Flickr Collection'. As nice as it is to get images selected by Getty, don't worry I'm not going to write a whole blog about it! What I did find interesting was that two of the eight images selected were shots I had taken on holiday with a Canon G1-X, a compact camera. Flicking through the images I have for sale on Getty. already around 15% of them were taken with this camera which I've only owned for a couple of months.

So why is this interesting? Well to me bigger always seemed to equal better in the camera world... the further you look up the camera ranges, the higher the spec (and price) gets, the bigger and heavier the camera gets. But times are changing, camera manufacturers are managing to squeeze 'big' camera technology and quality into smaller and smaller cameras and big doesn't necessarily equal better anymore. Images from my Canon compact are good enough for Image libraries like Getty and if Sony RX-1 can fit a full frame 35mm sensor into a camera that sits in the palm of your hand then surely anything is possible?

Maybe to say big isn't better is getting carried away, there's still not many compacts that can compete with the best of the DSLR world let alone medium format, but small certainly doesn't suck anymore. With a small camera you have more freedom to go un-noticed which can provide you with more opportunities for interesting photos... safe in the knowledge that the end result will be good enough to print.

I love my hefty DSLR but it's nice to have a DSLR 'lite' when you need it.