What is with all these beginners with $1000+ cameras?

[usayit]

I am not exactly sure where you come off telling someone what is the best or worst camera for them. I like you used to be the guy on the other side of he counter and really hated to see the people who made it their purpose to tel people exactly what they needed. When I sold I guided people to things and gave them options but would never presume to know exactly wht thy NEEDED. And by the way telling someone a good flash is a better way to get a good image shows that you have a little to learn yourself.

Dude.. stay in context.

We were talking about unnecessary spending on expensive camera equipment by beginners. He stated that the most expensive camera=better photos for his wife stating explicitly that the 5D+24-70L as an example. I simply replied responded stating that the 5D is about the worst choice for his example.

Let me set this straight. I do not tell people or push people to buy what I feel... BUT.. I will give them my opinion if they ask for it. By responding to my post specifically giving the 5D_24-70L as an example opens the door for me to respond with my opinion. My comment needs to be taken in context as a response NOT as a statement in of itself.

Sure... I'll sell $$$$ of equipment to whoever wants it... its a business. But last time I checked this wasn't a forum about business and sales. Then again.. as i stated before.. there are two discussions going on here at the same time.

 

[Fally]

Well, before this newb gets skewered and grilled, my fiancee bought my D80, 18-200 VR and SB800 for me for our engagement ring. I bought a ring for her, she bought a camera for me!

Now, being new, and admittedly an automatic point and shooter, I'm using this camera to get into photography. Why would I want to settle for something that I'm going to need to get upgraded sooner than later?

Frustrating a new photographer with limitations of their camera that they reach far earlier than they should is not what will progress communities like this. Allowing any amateur the flexibility to buy what they choose should not be hit with the stigma of "experienced" photographers.

When I buy higher-end goods, it's because I'm not blowing cash all over hell's half acre. I'm buying good items that will withstand the next 2 generations of something and then, I'll buy the upgrade.

I would say, rather than chastize the people that are buying things that maybe you can't, or choose not to, help them learn. There was only one person that posted they would offer assistance to show the other person how to utilize their camera to it's potential.

It seems rather elitist to be criticizing people that choose to spend their money how they choose, by people who, as a generalization, might not be in the same socio-economic status. That's what makes this debate so foolish.

And yes, that's the biggest determining factor in this debate, always. The socio-economic status.

 

[Dubious Drewski]

Well, before this newb gets skewered and grilled
....
I'm using this camera to get into photography. Why would I want to settle for something that I'm going to need to get upgraded sooner than later?

Frustrating a new photographer with limitations of their camera that they reach far earlier than they should is not what will progress communities like this.

Don't worry, I think they're talking more about the clueless newbies who buy a kit like that and then don't know, or care to know how to use it. You're in the clear.:thumbup:

 

[usayit]

Being a bit of a pacifist, I want to agree, but I don't. If everyone minds their own business, then there's no conflict, and interesting threads such as this one would never be born.

I say "keep it up, guys! You're doing a splendid job entertaining me and helping me procrastinate!"

What he said... hehehe glad we are providing entertainment for you this morning.

But yeh... buy what ever you want. I've recently gone Leica and no one.. I mean NO ONE.. seems to understand my choice and thinks I'm nuts.. (am I?). I am also the first to admit that all my cameras, past and present, were more than I needed. I'll sell you whatever you want if I'm on the other side the counter too...


I think the best bang for the buck out there right now is from Pentax.. K10D and K20D. Simply because their cameras don't have Canon nor Nikon written on them makes it a hard sell.. Explain that one in terms of pure photographic intentions? They are cheaper too....

 

[domromer]

Wow this thread has gone haywire! What were we talking about?

 

[JIP]

Dude.. stay in context.

We were talking about unnecessary spending on expensive camera equipment by beginners. He stated that the most expensive camera=better photos for his wife stating explicitly that the 5D+24-70L as an example. I simply replied responded stating that the 5D is about the worst choice for his example.

Can you tell me why exactly???

 

[usayit]

Can you tell me why exactly???

You are assuming the newb want to "learn photography".
.....
When my wife wanted a "better camera", if she had seen pictures from you guys here ... she would have bought the 5D with whatever lens you guys used for that incredible picture. I'm sure the 5D with the 24-70 f/2.8L will take better pictures then the SD800IS which I gave her - even in green box mode mode .

That is $2500 in hands of a newb who will never have it off green box, will constantly complain about having to look through eyepiece, but will be perfectly happy because the camera allows her to take pictures of daughter running around in low light.

I took from this...

wife... better camera... newb.. not necessarily interested in photography.. wants a "better camera".. wants to use camera in full auto.

his recommendation... 5D + 24-70L

I don't agree with his recommendation for the following reasons:

1) The 5D is lacking any "creative" modes. It only has the "core" Manual, shutter, aperture, program modes. The lower end models would best suited for her as she can choose between portrait, landscape, action, etc.. and the camera will select the best shutter/aperture combinations given the selected mode. On the 5D, one would need at least the fundamentals in order to leverage the camera.
2) 5D+24-70L is a very heavy setup. For the typical snapshooter, a heavy camera will equate to one that is left at home often. This equates to a very bad investment and experience.
3) Try explaining to her why she'll spend more money on a zoom of 24-70 (pretty darn short) when a MUCH cheaper P&S will have an effective zoom range of around 24-200mm. Canon G9 for example is equivalent 35-210mm with a measly 6x zoom.
4) Try explaining to her why a 5D costing several times more than the Rebel 450D still has the same number of Megapixels. Try to explain to her that the 5D+24-70 is worth the premium cost over the G9.

I am confused, JIP, the answer was in the post you quoted...

oops.. I also forgot to mention that the 5D has no built-in flash just for sheer convenience.

 

[CanAm]

I'm fairly sure Mystwalker's example using the 5D was hypothetical or hyperbole.

 

[Battou]

I got a D40x with a big fancy lens cuz it makes me look like im good. It just makes me feel better about myself thinking people think im taking better photos then them cuz I look bad azz with my gear!

lol, Personally I feel on top of the world walking around town with my rawdawg gear over my shoulder, walking into the coffee shop setting a couple lenses on the table and sipping coffee wile I sit. My Canon EF, FD mount 80-200, 50mm and 35mm primes look all holier than thou are next to a cup of coffee.

Actually, Battou, don't sell yourself short. You are exactly right... In hands of most photographers, the 350D will produce just as good of a photo as the 1D markII. The features that place a premium on the 1D are not features that make a better photographer.

(A large portion of the cost of the 1D is built into the camera's ability to survive the rigors of professional use. Dropped, banged, rained on, long battery life, weather sealing, long life shutter, etc).

Yes, that is exactly why I made such an example. I was (still am) under the impression that the OP's original curiosity was geared towards the question of why are people buying gear with options they not only don't need but have little to no use for and paying out the rectal orifice for it. It seemed to be leading into the direction of a P&S vs SLR when it is actually entry level SLR VS advanced SLR VS Pro SLR. I blew it out of proportion to bring it into perspective a bit.

I too personally don't care how others spend their money, quite frankly all these people who firmly believe they will get better pictures out of the newest camera on the market only inflate my ego as I toddle around town with my archaic little black box. In the aria of people who literally have the money to drop two or three thousand dollars just for a toy to play with...What Ever do what you are gonna do it's your money. If you can afford to own that Corvette and still get all four kids to soccer practice, more power to ya. The fact remains some people are being drawn into buying a camera that is not suited to them and actually technically out of their price range, thus is my issue.

I personally feel that if you can not afford atleast two lenses after the body with a kit lens, you are getting the wrong camera. This is made worse with the decline of experienced camera dealers and venders. For those in the market to learn, paying for the options you are going to use should out weigh the ones you won't. I know you know this but it needs to be said, there are some things that can only be learned with experience, shooting with different lenses is one of them. Why hinder your self like that, it's like selling your minivan to buy that Corvette, you won't get them there any faster if you have to make two trips, right.

 

[Mystwalker]

I'm fairly sure Mystwalker's example using the 5D was hypothetical or hyperbole.

It was

But if she did see one of the photos I often see here and learned that it was taken with a 5D (or 1Ds, whatever) with a 24-70L (or whatever lens), she will want that same set up.

I guess the 5D wasn't a good example because it does not sound like it has the green box mode. But a high end camera with that green box mode will help newbs take better pictures then they would using a P&S?

DSLRs are expensive P&S for most people. Most people are not trying to "learn photography", they just want to take good pictures of their family, vacations, or whatever. They see the "profession photos" and they look at the equipment used, and think they can duplicate it with similar (better) equipment.

For some people, $1000 is not much for something they think can capture instances of their life or of their loved ones. Probably not the wisest decision, but it's their money - they work for it like everyone else here.

 

[Battou]

...
I guess the 5D wasn't a good example because it does not sound like it has the green box mode. But a high end camera with that green box mode will help newbs take better pictures then they would using a P&S?

...

WTH is green box mode?

 

[Mystwalker]

WTH is green box mode?

That's what I saw someone else call it - the auto mode.

Thought all cameras used a "green box".

 

[Battou]

That's what I saw someone else call it - the auto mode.

Thought all cameras used a "green box".

Oh....:lmao: I feel dumb now.....I think I have an entire one camera in my entire collection with such.

 

[Alex_B]

I guess the 5D wasn't a good example because it does not sound like it has the green box mode. But a high end camera with that green box mode will help newbs take better pictures then they would using a P&S?

Öhm, I think the 5D has such a mode. I think I once switched it on by accident .... But no, the potential of the 5D can only be unlocked when you yourself decide about shutter and aperture and all ...

It does not have the so called creative modes though, since it is expected from the photographer to know how to be creative

Anyway, even if it had those modes, I would not recommend the camera for the typical I-don't-care holiday party and family snapshooter. any p&s is better for them.

 

[rmh159]

Exactly why is this off base??? The point of a business is to sell a product for as much profit (higher prices) as possible without causing the market to fall out from underneath it.

If the consumers are willing to pay/go into debt, to buy all those cameras then yes... this can cause the price to rise (of course taking into consideration supply/demand). This is the same for eggs, Xboxes, and cameras. Now oil is a bit on different due to the regulations involved. "Necessity of daily life" type products are nothing special... they are just like any other product with the exception that regulations are often in place due to the fact that they are necessities (for example: you can't cut off someone's heat in the middle of winter).

Technology ages quickly so it's not a good comparison. That's why tech companies replace models so quickly. For example Nikon comes out with a D40 and they price it at $600 (not sure what the actual price is so I'm guessing a bit). Even if it sells well they're not going to increase the price. They make their profit because the cost to produce it drops due to the aged tech inside it.

By comparing to something like oil or eggs, to me, sounds like the argument is being made that if a Nikon D40 sells well, a year or so after it's intoduction Nikon would raise the price of it.

Sorry to get so off topic. :blushing: