General suggestion when responding

KmH · Dec 14, 2013

At the bottom of the forum main page just before I started writing this post it said:

There are currently 1752 users online. 148 members and 1604 guests

Note to this is a Saturday evening.

The vast majority of people that visit TPF and read the forum posts aren't members, and like above, the ratio is often 10x+ guests to 1 member.

Consequently not everyone that visits TPF is looking for the least expensive options.

Since it's been estimated that 15% of all the people control 85% of all the money, 1 or 2 of those 10+ guest can afford some of the more expensive gear that gets mentioned.

Plus lots of people like to see some of the ultimate gear, lust after it, and dream about owning it - like lusting after a brand new $425,000 USD Ferrari 458 Speciale.

Or think of it this way - after looking at a $5800 lens, a $2600 f/2.8 zoom lens with the same focal length seems like quite a bargain.

minicoop1985 · Dec 15, 2013

KmH said:
Consequently not everyone that visits TPF is looking for the least expensive options.

Since it's been estimated that 15% of all the people control 85% of all the money, 1 or 2 of those 10+ guest can afford some of the more expensive gear that gets mentioned.

Plus lots of people like to see some of the ultimate gear, lust after it, and dream about owning it - like lusting after a brand new $425,000 USD Ferrari 458 Speciale.

Or think of it this way - after looking at a $5800 lens, a $2600 f/2.8 zoom lens with the same focal length seems like quite a bargain.

This is exactly why I recommend every beginner buy a Hasselblad H5D60. It's something they'll never outgrow, and, usually, by taking out a second mortgage, it becomes quite affordable.

:lol:

But really, Runnah has a good point. I'm always looking for the least expensive way to get what it is I need. And an H5D is never the least expensive anything, ever, I'd imagine.

mmaria · Dec 16, 2013

I've just seen this thread... got to say that I thought to start one with the same issue.

I really really get annoyed when someone say, you should buy this or that. cameras, lenses, flashes, softboxes...

Sometimes OP doesn't have the basic knowledge of composition and yet somehow he/she get "buy this or that" replies.

Or for the lighting f.e. from the photo OP posted you can clearly see that he/she doesn't understand how to use light. It's not the solution to say buy this blah blah. They don't need to buy anything (except maybe some book or course about using light). I haven't seen anywhere here (but I might be completely wrong) explanaton in few simple words where should light be in regard to the subject. I think that simple statement is more helpfull then, buy a flash, softbox, diffuser etc...

And also, have you seen how many replies is in every "What I should buy?" and how many there is for "C&C please"?

Don't get it, really.

You can learn about light, composition and other with PS camera, or even without a camera at all.

Train your brain to see important things, don't empty your pocket hoping that some expensive gear would solve your problems.

TheFantasticG · Dec 16, 2013

Sometimes it takes expensive gear to make a shot or make a shot much easier to make... Situational of course. For example: The macro images I want to take and the lightning scape and astroscape photos I want to make have certain gear requirements if I want to achieve a certain look and there is simply no way around it.

To that point Overread is right that it is easier if they give a budget they are trying to stay in. I, for one, assume unlimited budget if they don't give one. I know that if I wasn't married and had a mortgage you better believe I'd be pimping a D4, Nikon 200mm f2, and every other piece of gear I wanted. My CFO is who keeps me in check... KmH is right as well.

mmaria · Dec 16, 2013

Sometimes the only solution is buying new gear, I agree. But if you are only at the beginning of your journey there are more important things you’ll need to learn.

If someone has a f4 lens f.e. Why don't tell that person how to achieve shallower dof with that particular lens instead of just "buy a faster lens".

Why not: Look carefully how available light inside of your house is changing during the day and find a perfect place to shoot your still life or else and learn how to enhance/control/diffuse that light. Or is it really better to hear: you’ll need to buy a flash, softbox and some other stuff to make your photos look good.

Or, if you think that only solution really is to buy new equipment, please explain to OP why the equipment that he/she has isn't good enough

gsgary · Dec 16, 2013

runnah said:
Try to give advice and work with the gear that the OP has rather than suggest very expensive equipment. Of course it'd be nice if everyone had super expensive glass and a tremendous studio but a lot of people can't afford it and have to work with what is given. It's lazy and counter productive.

Also don't assume that a photographer didn't get the best angle and position possible given the situation. I know when I am out and about I try to get the best locations but often roads, rivers, cliffs and trees make it difficult.

Is this because you have cheap gear

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

runnah · Dec 16, 2013

gsgary said:
Is this because you have cheap gear Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

Naw I got good stuff but I didn't always and I never let it stop me.

paigew · Dec 16, 2013

Speaking from personal experience. It is extremely disheartening to be told you can only get a good photo if you buy XYZ. For my family, purchasing my first camera (rebel) was a huge purchase. To find out I needed lights, backdrops, etc on top of that was very frustrating. I took it upon myself to learn how to create the images I wanted without all the 'stuff'.

I think if someone wants to create a specific image, that needs specific gear, then by all means recommend it! But if it just a beginner, learning how to take photos give advice based on what they already own. Great thread.

sashbar · Dec 16, 2013

mmaria said:
I've just seen this thread... got to say that I thought to start one with the same issue.

I really really get enoyed when someone say, you should buy this or that. cameras, lenses, flashes, softboxes...

Sometimes OP doesn't have the basic knowledge of composition and yet somehow he/she get "buy this or that" replies.

Or for the lighting f.e. from the photo OP posted you can clearly see that he/she doesn't understand how to use light. It's not the solution to say buy this blah blah. They don't need to buy anything (except maybe some book or course about using light). I haven't seen anywhere here (but I might be completely wrong) explanaton in few simple words where should light be in regard to the subject. I think that simple statement is more helpfull then, buy a flash, softbox, diffuser etc...

And also, have you seen how many replies is in every "What I should buy?" and how many there is for "C&C please"?

Don't get it, really.

I am not surprised at all. For many years I was very much into hi-fi ( or hi-end, as they say) - and it was exactly the same: a lot of talk about gear, acoustics, frequency curves, vibrations, second reflections, materials and circuits, and very rarely the music was being mentioned. Hi-fi buffs usually know music better that an average guy, but a relatively small percent of them really understand it, very few attend classical concerts and a lot buy a system that costs you an arm and a leg and and acoustically treat their rooms turning it into some sort of a warehouse, only to listen to some compressed, overprocessed pop c**p. They are proud that their system allows them to count a number of fiddles in the orchestra and they can hear every cough and rustling in the audience. This is the exact equivalent of pixel peeping, "super sharpness", "creamy bokeh", and other stuff that is being talked about most of the time.

So it is exactly the same here, people buy "hi-end" cameras and shoot their cats and cars. But both hi-fi and photo gearheads get a great kick out of it because they love the gadgets and the technical side of their hobby. And it is easy - there are instructions and manuals, and you know exactly what happens if you press the button. And it is easy to give an advice, because all the answers are there on the net. When it comes to creative side of things, all of a sudden it all gets complicated, vague, personal and ambivalent. No buttons, no manuals.. sharpness as a creative tool becomes a bit more complex compared to sharpness as such.. So C&C, even if you get one, is also mostly about the technical stuff rather than a creative idea. I guess this is becase creative ideas are very difficult, first to grasp, then to analyse, and finally to put into words. Especially for a guy like me when words are foreign

Even if you read books on photography, most authors, established photographers, struggle with their "creative analysis" and succumb to cliches, artificial clumsy concepts or sheer banalities.

robbins.photo · Dec 16, 2013

sashbar said:
I am not surprised at all. For many years I was very much into hi-fi ( or hi-end, as they say) - and it was exactly the same: a lot of talk about gear, acoustics, frequency curves, vibrations, second reflections, materials and circuits, and very rarely the music was being mentioned. Hi-fi buffs usually know music better that an average guy, but a relatively small percent of them really understand it, very few attend classical concerts and a lot buy a system that costs you an arm and a leg and and acoustically treat their rooms turning it into some sort of a warehouse, only to listen to some compressed, overprocessed pop c**p. They are proud that their system allows them to count a number of fiddles in the orchestra and they can hear every cough and rustling in the audience. This is the exact equivalent of pixel peeping, "super sharpness", "creamy bokeh", and other stuff that is being talked about most of the time.

Ok..so by classical were you thinking ABBA or Bee-Gees? Rotfl

So it is exactly the same here, people buy "hi-end" cameras and shoot their cats and cars. But both hi-fi and photo gearheads get a great kick out of it because they love the gadgets and the technical side of their hobby. And it is easy - there are instructions and manuals, and you know exactly what happens if you press the button. And it is easy to give an advice, because all the answers are there on the net. When it comes to creative side of things, all of a sudden it all gets complicated, vague, personal and ambivalent. No buttons, no manuals.. sharpness as a creative tool becomes a bit more complex compared to sharpness as such.. So C&C, even if you get one, is also mostly about the technical stuff rather than a creative idea. I guess this is becase creative ideas are very difficult, first to grasp, then to analyse, and finally to put into words. Especially for a guy like me when words are foreign Even if you read books on photography, most authors, established photographers, struggle with their "creative analysis" and succumb to cliches, artificial clumsy concepts or sheer banalities.

I guess when it comes to art I'm stricly in the "I know it when I see it" crowd. I do enjoy some of the technical aspects of photography, but I tend to think some folks get way too hung up on gear. Sure the better gear makes things easier to do, but there are a lot of things you can do with just some basic gear and a good understanding of how to use it to your advantage. Just my two cents of course, YMMV

sashbar · Dec 16, 2013

robbins.photo said:
Ok..so by classical were you thinking ABBA or Bee-Gees? Rotfl

No, these are medieval. Classical is Kurt Cobain Orchestra. :violin:

runnah · Dec 16, 2013

Audiophiles are the worst of the worst IMO.

Car people are the same. Guys spend thousands of dollars and hours on the dyno to get that little more HP, yet most never go out and drive.

robbins.photo · Dec 16, 2013

runnah said:
Audiophiles are the worst of the worst IMO.

Car people are the same. Guys spend thousands of dollars and hours on the dyno to get that little more HP, yet most never go out and drive.

Well your close on both counts - audiophiles are bad, car people are worse.. but combine the two and you'll soon see what the expression living hell was coined for - lol. Spend an hour with a car audio guy, if you dare. Just be advised the likelyhood of suicide is astronomical.

runnah · Dec 16, 2013

robbins.photo said:
runnah said:

Audiophiles are the worst of the worst IMO.

Car people are the same. Guys spend thousands of dollars and hours on the dyno to get that little more HP, yet most never go out and drive.

Click to expand...

Well your close on both counts - audiophiles are bad, car people are worse.. but combine the two and you'll soon see what the expression living hell was coined for - lol. Spend an hour with a car audio guy, if you dare. Just be advised the likelyhood of suicide is astronomical.