Is how expensive your camera is important or isn't it?

[photogir2002]

First, sorry I didn't respond to all these comments. I must have turned notifications off in my email because I didn't realize these were all here. Now, I'm going back to read all the comments....sure it is an interesting thread and thanks for contributing to the question!!!

 

[photogir2002]

Great points!

When you hear examples of worldclass photographers taking great shots with i-phones, it's because they are operating within the limitations of that camera or under very controlled conditions

You also have to define what a "great shot" is; because most of the time when people say that very low end gear can take great shots because its the photographer, they are talking purely from an artistic point of view with regard to content and composition - quality of the photo and the possible end-uses of it are often not considered factors.
You can take good photos with any gear provided you work within its limitations - however almost anyone who takes photography more seriously than snapshots aims to ensure that they have the best possible tools to produce the best results possible and to have the fewest limitations upon them when shooting - allowing them to better realise and create the art and compositions they want with the tools they have.

 

[photogir2002]

Don't think I can end thread, can I? I don't see anywhere I can do that. I'll let the moderator handle it. If that's the case.

A good photographer with the best gear will take better photos than that same photographer with really crappy gear.

Gear matters.....a lot in fact.

/endthread

 

[Village Idiot]

Don't think I can end thread, can I? I don't see anywhere I can do that. I'll let the moderator handle it. If that's the case.

A good photographer with the best gear will take better photos than that same photographer with really crappy gear.

Gear matters.....a lot in fact.

/endthread

-10 internets

"/endthread" is when a person thinks they have the best post and reply and that no further discussion is needed.

 

[photogir2002]

I know. I know. Just being a smartass. Thanks for the education, though!

Don't think I can end thread, can I? I don't see anywhere I can do that. I'll let the moderator handle it. If that's the case.

A good photographer with the best gear will take better photos than that same photographer with really crappy gear.

Gear matters.....a lot in fact.

/endthread

-10 internets

"/endthread" is when a person thinks they have the best post and reply and that no further discussion is needed.

 

[unpopular]

/endthread is just arrogant /btard lingo ... 4chan takz ova yur internetz. rezistanz iz fyootile.

 

[Neil S.]

I was trying to stay away, hoping this thread would die.

Seems there’s no such luck with people like unpopular coming in with their winning posts such as "/endthread is just arrogant /btard lingo ... 4chan takz ova yur internetz. rezistanz iz fyootile."

I haven't even decided what language this is yet, I am guessing its some dialect of troll though.

Of course artistic vision and shooting skill play a major part in the quality of your photos. Gear and technical aspects matter as well though. The photographer being equal, better gear is better. This is not something you can argue with me on and win lol, so stop trying.

To all of you that think gear doesn’t matter, I say you are just fooling yourself.

Again and again in this thread people are saying that "a good photographer can take better photos with a (insert low end camera here) than some noob could take with a (insert high end camera here).

This is irrelevant though, and it is the same as me saying "A good race car driver with a Prius can beat a 4 year old with a Ferrari in a race". While this is true, who really cares?

When we are talking about the importance of gear, it has to be when all other things are equal (which they are for a single given person).

It's about how much photo gear matters for me, or you, or that guy over there. Not how much gear matters for a noob compared to a pro, your focusing on all the wrong things here. You have been comparing apples to oranges, in a weak attempt to convince people that gear doesn't matter.

Upgrading from a 30D and EF-S lenses, to a 7D and L glass has improved the quality of my photos. The increase in my skill has helped as well, but the pure image quality improvements of my photos are directly related to gear. These are facts, and cannot be disputed.

Why would you even try and argue such an absurd and obviously flawed position?

 

[usayit]

Rob Galbraith DPI: Alex Majoli points and shoots

Yup really obviously flawed. :er:

There is no obviously wrong or right position here.

 

[Neil S.]

Rob Galbraith DPI: Alex Majoli points and shoots

Yup really obviously flawed. :er:

There is no obviously wrong or right position here.

Ya actually they are lol!

You didn’t notice the terrible dynamic range? Look at how blown the shadows (#1) and highlights (#3) are in them.

Are you saying that a FF DSLR and pro glass wouldn’t have taken much better photos here? Really?

Also those are like 440x300 pix, not exactly printed large or wallpaper size (1080p+ monitor).

And as Derrel said, don’t you shoot Leica cameras and lenses lol? I don't see how someone who does can say that price of gear doesn't matter.

You must be a fool for spending that much then, when you could have just bought a point and shoot since it is the same (according to you). Either that or you are a hypocrite, take you pick....

Neil

 

[chaosrealm93]

or so rich people want the common folk to think..

 

[usayit]

And as Derrel said, don’t you shoot Leica cameras and lenses lol? I don't see how someone who does can say that price of gear doesn't matter.

Um... you are so busy writing and tootin your horn that you forgot that I actually did say that gear matters...... just not for the same reasons you give. I'll say it again... tools are enablers no more or no less.

So I have to be poor in order to have an opinion or argument? That's asinine. Hypocrite is someone who says one thing but does another. I buy expensive Leica cameras not because it makes me a better photographer. I never said it makes for a better photographer nor did I say it makes for a worse photographer. I said it again... its the underlying premise that I disagree with.

Alex is a far more accomplished photographer than you nor I. The photos you poke fun at are published and excepted for publication. This simply proves my point that

1) Best better is so subjective (as someone Overread? mentioned)
2) It doesn't matter within the confines of what you are trying to deliver. Ex. Dynamic range etc... might matter to one artisan (you for example) but not for another (war photographer/ journalist).

Since you obviously haven't read my previous post.... I'll say it again

Enabler ... no more no less
Photographer and equipment are inseparable.

 

[unpopular]

I was trying to stay away, hoping this thread would die.Seems there’s no such luck with people like unpopular coming in with their winning posts such as "/endthread is just arrogant /btard lingo ... 4chan takz ova yur internetz. rezistanz iz fyootile."I haven't even decided what language this is yet, I am guessing its some dialect of troll though.

LOL. No speek lolspeek? Maybez good fotoman need sens uf humur an vizit Icanhazcheezeburger.com, no?

Or seriously. The thread already died. You haven't added anything new, Neil, get over yourself; and before posting something as insidious as calling someone a troll, one might want to see what said person has contributed - rather than the manifesto of same old analogies said a billion times prior over the last 5 pages.

Smart fotoman shuld take hiz "nabokov-esque I post, because I must post' elzwere.

Despite what the profoto establishment believes, image quality is not just about sharpness and resolution, but also vision and communication. My photographs will never be printed at much larger than 11x17 due to the physical resolution limitations of my equipment. I don't shoot beyond ISO 200, nor did I with film. This is the equipment I can afford. I live limited income, have other interests, a two year old son and a wife attending prelaw.

While I am more limited by my gear than I would be if it were more expensive, I don't let that interfere with my artistic vision and intentions. I can still communicate these things effectively by choosing how to make images. I don't shoot in low light. I don't choose compositions that would benefit from large prints. I even believe my artistic abilities improve by these self-limiting measures. No matter what kind of fancy metering modes I may have available, I'm pretty sure I'd always shoot full manual with the spot meter. Photographic technique is, after all, about choices.

You didn’t notice the terrible dynamic range? Look at how blown the shadows (#1) and highlights (#3) are in them.

Neil

This is just ridiculous. Every camera has limited dynamic range, it's up to the photographer to work within that dynamic range. Even a Hasselblad is going to face conditions that go beyond it's latitude. Ansel Adams knew this. That' why we have the Zone System.

 

[photogir2002]

Well for the record...I'm not arguing (not that I think you think I am.) I asked the question because I really wanted to know what others thought and I think you have some of the most valid points here. So, to you, I say, thank you!! You have proven your point in a good way! T

 

[2WheelPhoto]

This thread is inspiration to purchase the best gear possible

 

[nickzou]

I'm pretty sure that good gear is important, but good gear does not always equal expensive gear. I mean, I could've got the D300s because it is more expensive and technically more "pro" than my current D7k. But after looking at the fact sheets and testing both cameras; I think the D7k is the superior camera despite being cheaper than the D300s.