Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by VADER1775, Nov 9, 2008.
Why not hire a pro with a D40?
Well here's the first question, why would they be calling themselves a pro? What context would they be using the word?
Why hire a Pro with a D40?
Say you want to hire someone for a job, like a dinner party, dance, even a wedding; when you meet the guy, he has a D40, SB whatever, and maybe a few lenses. Do you keep him? Why not?
Thanks for the input, dude.
It comes down to his portfolio. Personally I could care less what equipment you use. But it is kind of irksome when someone says they are a pro, which to me means they make 51% or better of their income from photography, and has beginner equipment. Yeah even low grade stuff can make excellent photos. But if you don't have a portfolio worth a damn, I wouldn't hire you.
good point kegger.
A better question might be what kind of pro would use a D40 as a main camera. It would be a major pain in the a$$ to use for almost everything I shot because I need to be able to change settings and such on the fly. You can take great photos with a D40 but I would more likely assume them to be to inexperienced to probably even know about all the options their camera has.
It could be seen as an ignorant thing. They don’t know about the available settings there for they must not exist.
I think a lot depends on the portfolio, but I would ask to see a whole shoot-- as in, what he gave to the clients. It's easy for someone to pick out a couple of good shots from a mass of crap to make a nice or decent portfolio. There is nothing wrong *per se* with someone using a D40 but it says that they are not particularly invested photography, or that they are a beginner who has not made a lot of money in the field to be able to upgrade their equipment. But on the other hand, they may simply have found that the D40 works for them, and have stuck with what works.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, someone calling themselves a pro and charging accordingly should have pro equipment.
Okay, say you are shooting RAW, using good quality lenses, light, and staging that is appropriate for whatever you are shooting.
Is there THAT much difference in the actual RAW data stored on the memory card from a shot taken with a D40 vs one of the other Nikon DSLRS, say in the range of the D60 / D80 / D90 / D200 ?
What about the D300 ??
Yes, there is a LOT less data on the D40 vs. the D90 or... besides, these are not pro cameras either... the Nikon Pro cameras are the D700 & D3, the D200 and D300 really are just prosumer models.
Besides, that's not really the issue... the issue is that the D40 isn't built to do the things pros need to do. It doesn't have auto bracketing. It doesn't have depth of field preview. I has a very crude focusing system (three AF points leads to composition issues and is clunky as all getout... IMHO it is the main 'flaw' with the D40). The menu system is crude and clunky and takes forever to use... there's no top LCD for checking settings. It also doesn't have a commander mode for shooting multi flash setups using Nikon flashes.
None of this stuff really affects the customer the camera is designed for, the entry level person, but pretty much ALL of it will affect a "Pro" user.
Separate names with a comma.