ted_smith
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 65
- Reaction score
- 0
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
A naive question this, but everyone seems friendly here so hopefully I won't get shot down too seriously!
I am considering venturing into the field of wedding\party\events photography - initally part time perhaps and hopefully one day, full-time. I've been told by quite a lot of people that my candid photography style could enable me to be quite successfull in that field. Although I admit, they are all friends and family telling me that so obviously they're biased!
All the photos I've taken are with my Nikon F65 35mm SLR. It's quite an old model (back to 1999 I think) and I bought it second hand about two years ago for £60. Everything I read about it is "A great camera for teaching people how to do photography" and that it "takes good pictures". But it always seem to be in the context of 'a beginners camera' and not for a pro.
What I'm unclear about is, lets say I took a photo that I thought was really good with my F65 camera and the standard 28mm-70mm lense that comes with it - for example this one : http://www.flickr.com/photos/ted_smith/257568932/ or this one : http://www.flickr.com/photos/ted_smith/301038806/in/pool-portrait/, how would they be so markeldy better if I took the same picture with, say, a £900 new Nikon camera body using the same lense, aperture settings, film etc? (BTW - I have recently bought the Nikon 60mm Macro which is a really good lense apparently but I haven't yet had any prints developed that were taken using it)
Surely, fundamentally, it all comes down to the photographer and all the expensive kit just makes it easier, but perhaps not necessarily better?
So, my question is - do I really need to buy a new camera in order to be a professional wedding\events\party photographer or could I turn up with my selection of quite good quality lenses and my F65??
Thanks - any advice warmyl received
Ted
I am considering venturing into the field of wedding\party\events photography - initally part time perhaps and hopefully one day, full-time. I've been told by quite a lot of people that my candid photography style could enable me to be quite successfull in that field. Although I admit, they are all friends and family telling me that so obviously they're biased!
All the photos I've taken are with my Nikon F65 35mm SLR. It's quite an old model (back to 1999 I think) and I bought it second hand about two years ago for £60. Everything I read about it is "A great camera for teaching people how to do photography" and that it "takes good pictures". But it always seem to be in the context of 'a beginners camera' and not for a pro.
What I'm unclear about is, lets say I took a photo that I thought was really good with my F65 camera and the standard 28mm-70mm lense that comes with it - for example this one : http://www.flickr.com/photos/ted_smith/257568932/ or this one : http://www.flickr.com/photos/ted_smith/301038806/in/pool-portrait/, how would they be so markeldy better if I took the same picture with, say, a £900 new Nikon camera body using the same lense, aperture settings, film etc? (BTW - I have recently bought the Nikon 60mm Macro which is a really good lense apparently but I haven't yet had any prints developed that were taken using it)
Surely, fundamentally, it all comes down to the photographer and all the expensive kit just makes it easier, but perhaps not necessarily better?
So, my question is - do I really need to buy a new camera in order to be a professional wedding\events\party photographer or could I turn up with my selection of quite good quality lenses and my F65??
Thanks - any advice warmyl received
Ted