Any famous/talented/pro photographers that use minimum equipment?

[IByte]

Buy me a case of Sam Adams, a dozen wings. Wait about eight beers through, and i will frigging astound you Oo!!

 

[Solarflare]

As far as I know, Neal Preston, who was Led Zeppelin's photographer for years, still uses film and does his work in an actual darkroom...

The question of the thread was MINIMUM equipment ? Chemical isnt minimum ... it still has substantial advantages over digital, after all.

 

[photolodico]

Annie Leibovitz talks a lot about how she started out just with a Leica for most of her early Rollingstone work and how in the past ten years she's tried to return to that for her personal projects.

 

[gsgary]

Annie Leibovitz talks a lot about how she started out just with a Leica for most of her early Rollingstone work and how in the past ten years she's tried to return to that for her personal projects.

Her early stuff in Rollingstone was shot with a Minolta SR-T 101

 

[JoshuaSimPhotography]

DigitalRev recently did a series of videos called Pro Tog Cheap Cam, where they got famous photographers and gave them lame cameras (lego, iPhone, etc.). And to be honest, they failed! they had no idea what to do, they had to use expensive flashes and equipment! So in the modern day, equipment is everything for a photographer. BUt someone like Ansel Adams, had very minimal equipment and only a month worth of photographical knowledge. So it goes to show, equipment doesn't matter...

 

[imagemaker46]

DigitalRev recently did a series of videos called Pro Tog Cheap Cam, where they got famous photographers and gave them lame cameras (lego, iPhone, etc.). And to be honest, they failed! they had no idea what to do, they had to use expensive flashes and equipment! So in the modern day, equipment is everything for a photographer. BUt someone like Ansel Adams, had very minimal equipment and only a month worth of photographical knowledge. So it goes to show, equipment doesn't matter...

I'd like to know what "famous" photographers failed. Being famous doesn't always make a person skillful.

 

[yerlem]

I think it is all about what kind of resources you have when you first start shooting. If you can have everything you want when you first start, then you are never going to have to think how you could have accomplished something without proper equipment. Obviously equipment limits you, but it's also important to be resourceful.

 

[fjrabon]

DigitalRev recently did a series of videos called Pro Tog Cheap Cam, where they got famous photographers and gave them lame cameras (lego, iPhone, etc.). And to be honest, they failed! they had no idea what to do, they had to use expensive flashes and equipment! So in the modern day, equipment is everything for a photographer. BUt someone like Ansel Adams, had very minimal equipment and only a month worth of photographical knowledge. So it goes to show, equipment doesn't matter...

I think this probably had more to do with not knowing the equipment than the quality of the equipment. They mostly seemed to just not know how to get the best out of what they were given because of unfamiliarity. The thing with lower quality equipment is that you can get great shots out of it, but you really have to know its strengths and weaknesses backwards and forwards. Its doubtful that these photographers were willing to put that kind of time and effort out of their busy lives for an 'experiment'.

For instance if someone has been shooting a D5000 with mediocre lenses for years, and then they move up to a D700 with top of the line glass, at first their work will actually tend to take a step back as they get used to what does and doesn't work with the camera, frame size and new lenses. This is one reason why a lot of times when people move 'up' in equipment, they jump to saying "man, equipment doesn't matter, my old pictures were just as good or better!" Then over months and months, if they stick to the new equipment and they better gain an intuitive feel of its strengths and weaknesses, and how to coax what you want out of it, the better equipment allows their new work to eclipse what they were doing previously.

It's 90% the talent of the photographer, 5% knowledge of the equipment and 5% the quality of the equipment. or something like that.

 

[caseysrt]

I took all of these with a Nikon D3100, a $60 tripod, and a Nikon 18-55 kit lens. Only add on was a circular polarizer.

Planning on taking some more this weekend.

View attachment 10839View attachment 10843

 

[fjrabon]

Another thing I think that needs to be differentiated between is minimalist gear v. 'low quality' gear. For instance, Leica's, while very minimalist, were always amongst the highest quality you could buy, especially for anything remotely photojournalistic. From the OP it's somewhat unclear which she's talking about. I dont think there are a whole lot of famous photographers who are using/used very low quality gear, unless that's part of a gimmick or something. That's not so much to say that they couldn't, as much as they don't have any reason to.