|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Does the camera type really matter?
Macphoto wrote: yes......no........maybe ~ Jul 05 12 01:25 pm Link This topic has come up several times here. I hope the following can clarify what is important, and what is not, regarding the type of camera being used. Composition, focus, exposure, and choice of subject matter, and/or how the subject is handled, is completely up to the photographer. On the other hand, especially if the capture is intended for use in creating a large print, the camera/lens should give one a large, clean, (noiseless), detailed file, with nice tonality, bokeh, etc., those are things that, even a great photographer CAN'T create with a shitty camera and lens. I believe that BOTH, the camera, and the photographer go into the creation of a stellar image. I also believe that the ultimate goal of any capture is the creation of a large print of amazing quality. In the "old days" the type of film I used gave me the best image quality possible at that time, today, digital cameras can either produce noisy, low resolution crap, or a gorgeous file, that contains all the detail, and clarity I saw in my viewfinder during the capture. -Don Jul 05 12 01:47 pm Link For all those talking about commercial shoots... Weddings... Sports... Etc... Theres a world of difference between that and shooting with a newbie model for port work. She hates powershots? I use my shitty 3mp powershot G2 all the time cause its fun.   Jul 05 12 01:49 pm Link Its not so much about having the gear, its about having the RIGHT gear for the job. I own two cameras, 1 does 99% of the job and 1 camera to do the 1% that the other camera can't do. Its really up to the photographer to decide what gear to use based on the shoot requirement. Yes its foolish for a llama or anyone else to dismiss the photographers choice of equipment he chooses to use for a shoot. Jul 05 12 01:51 pm Link Jul 05 12 02:08 pm Link Don Garrett wrote: ^^^THIS Jul 05 12 02:32 pm Link I have worked with photographers using a variety of different cameras over the years, and I think technique is more important than exactly which camera they use. Jul 05 12 02:38 pm Link A camera is just a tool. Jul 05 12 02:39 pm Link Darryl Varner wrote: OMG, did you really say that! Jul 05 12 02:41 pm Link Don Garrett wrote: We have a difference of opinion. Jul 05 12 03:53 pm Link light is the currency of photography. Well said...the most important part of a camera is also the ten inches behind it... Jul 05 12 04:04 pm Link Michael Fryd wrote: Yep, we have a difference of opinion. Jul 05 12 05:44 pm Link no. a good photographer can shoot with anything. Jul 05 12 05:46 pm Link I am not among any elite here, but I am plugging away. I take lots of product pictures and love, love, lobe my Olympus EOS. I can take it anywhere and not look make a scene. Sometimes, though, it gets borrowed by my fiancee... who wants a more portable camera than what he uses. It really is all about knowing your equipment, and your plan. Jul 05 12 06:05 pm Link AJScalzitti wrote: Isn't that an obvious sign that she's trying to hide the fact that she flakes? Jul 05 12 06:06 pm Link Macphoto wrote: Something recent comes to mind where a group of talented photographers did iPhone only photoshoots. Same deal as any other organized shoot but instead of a DSLR all shots were to be done on the iPhone. Jul 05 12 06:10 pm Link First, welcome back Chris. While excellent results can be made with any camera. There are differences and we all know it. Full frame vs. crop sensors. Cheap zooms vs. L series lens, etc. Another issue is how you are seen. Model tests... who cares but for a client paying you decent money they don't want to see a Fuji S1 pro unless your Albert Watson or David Bailey. That meaning once you've established that your work is solid and useable it may not matter. Art directors tend to know what the standards are. Commercial work can be exacting and is part of why working pros tend to avoid prosumer cameras and lights. I've seen wonderful billboards done with six and eight megapixel cameras. I've also seen work produced by the H4D-60 and there are differences. If your work consists largely of what is largely here then it doesn't matter but.... if you are looking to do serious real world advertising, architectural, catalogue, food, beauty and product then what you use can make or break you. Jul 05 12 06:32 pm Link Let's put it this way. If you don't know what you're doing it doesn't matter what gear you're using. If you do, you can make the most of any gear you have. Jul 05 12 06:38 pm Link Art Silva Photography wrote: That was Fstoppers and that was more about lighting than the actual phone/camera itself. Jul 05 12 06:41 pm Link What's a camera? Jul 05 12 06:51 pm Link Shutterbug5269 wrote: +1 Glad someone said it. Jul 05 12 06:55 pm Link The photographer should have put on his/her portfolio that he wouldn't work with her because she didn't have big enough boobs! Jul 05 12 07:05 pm Link Macphoto wrote: It sure does. Jul 05 12 07:09 pm Link Shutterbug5269 wrote: +1 Enuf said! Jul 05 12 07:20 pm Link Illuminate wrote: Exactly, that just proves the OP's point. Jul 05 12 08:16 pm Link Mirror With A Memory wrote: what's in your toolbox??? Jul 05 12 08:31 pm Link If your shooting for a web based models portfolio it makes little difference However, a DSLR makes it easer to get the photos you want, tried using a point and shoot just for fun and found it hard to shoot holding the camera at arms length tiring to see the LCD screen on the back of the camera in bright sun light. The slow shutter response took a bit of getting use to. Trying to set time, aperture or f-stop was a bit of a trick as its buried in several layers of menus. Take one photo and had to re do everything. The other part it was shot in .jpg so one could not easily tweak the exposure on the raw file or set white balance after the shot. Plus the bigger DSLR sensor had richer looking photos, with less noise. So bottom line will a point and shoot work yes, is a DSLR better yes Jul 05 12 08:37 pm Link GeM Photographic wrote: Thank god someone got that Jul 05 12 08:42 pm Link Macphoto wrote: To be fair- Your G12 is at the very high end of the fixed lens cameras Canon offers- it has a hot shoe, Manual modes, can shoot raw. I dont suspect most models would know that. I think what she was maybe trying to say is ... she is ok with working with people who actually make photographic decisions in their photography- and dont just rely on an automatic camera like their siblings, friends, and family might. Now, I know even with a fully automatic camera there are still potentially lots of decisions like available or continuous lighting, styling, posing, expressions, etc. But to be fair- most people who think in terms of those things wouldnt shoot with a fully automated camera though. At least not unless they had to or it was some "prove I can do it" stunt. Thats probably the reason you chose a G12 isnt it? I mean as opposed to like a cute pink powershot elph or A series camera? Jul 05 12 08:48 pm Link Macphoto wrote: If it gets the images that you want (and she was impressed by those) then that's the gear you use. It's not like you're doing a tatoo on her with dirty needles. I mean really... Jul 05 12 09:07 pm Link The camera gear DOES matter IF the photographer is proficient. Depending upon the subject matter and the output format, the subtle differences may not be discernible in low res web images. Jul 05 12 09:15 pm Link -B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: Leicas, right? Jul 05 12 09:26 pm Link I'm curious...... all these hotshot Pro Photographers talking about their cameras and what equipment is good.... what equipment is bad.... you can tell a high end quality camera from a low end quality camera.... or even if it's a DSLR compared to an old time SLR. Comparing what lens is best for what....  Tell me what sort of camera was this shot with.....? Was it a one time use Fuji film camera? Maybe a digital P&S... How about a Canon Rebel? How about an old 35mm film SLR..... Well what was it? You're such experts about this subject...... what was it? Have a look in my port at my landscapes and tell me what I used..... Impress me........ Jul 05 12 09:28 pm Link We all know that good images can be made with anything from a cheap phone camera up to the most expensive medium format digital back. However, if you're a model, or a client working with a photographer, whom you haven't worked with before, and they show up with a point and shoot, then I think it's perfectly valid to judge them on that. There are a lot of bad models and poor photographers on MM, and sometimes you need a good shorthand way of deciding if it's worth your time to work with someone. That doesn't mean your judgement is accurate, and it seems to me the better option would be to express skepticism, but let him take a few test shots and see how you like the results before going further, but if she was that quick to nix the shoot, she may have had doubts already... Even though it may not hold true all of the time, good photographers generally care enough about their work to spend a little money on their gear. No model wants to have her time wasted... and the fact of the matter is, a point and shoot will not give any photographer the same control over exposure and depth of field that a DSLR or better camera will. Does that mean he couldn't have gotten good images of her? Of course not. But I think we can all agree that any given photographer can get better images with a low end DSLR than a high end point and shoot. These days the price difference is minimal between those two categories, and I feel certain that if he had been using anything with a detachable lens, she never would have given it a second thought. Ironically, I was in nearly the same situation a few months ago. I lit a dance show, and the choreographer hired a photographer to come from Houston to shoot the dress rehearsal. I'd seen his work and knew he was good, so I was surprised when he set down his sweet Canon with the telephoto lens and started shooting with a point and shoot. Curious and skeptical, I moved in for a closer look and asked what he was using. Turns out it was a Leica X1, and the wide-angle images he took with that are some of the best shots of the night. Jul 05 12 09:44 pm Link BigSky Photo Art wrote: I can't tell but this is a web site where images are compressed. If you were hired to shoot a high end beauty campaign would you use a Cannon Rebel? Pixels, glass and cameras matter. Not so much for the editorial styled work most here do but for high end jewelry shots or product and food and fashion as well. Kit lenses work well for most of us but they are often flawed in areas that pro quality lenses are not. Jul 05 12 10:26 pm Link What was the content of the shoot? If the shoot was lingerie/nudes I'm guessing she had GWC alarm bells screaming in her head which in my opinion would justify her response. If it was a fashion/portrait shoot and she had done her homework the yes I do agree that she may have been over cautious. Like usual we don't really have all the details to be making a valid judgement on the whole story. Jul 05 12 10:30 pm Link If its for you a p&s might do but not to a bride and groom who are paying you. Owning a dslr is also making a statement. I have one that cost me several thousands as also one that cost me a few hundreds. Looking around you can get a used entry dslr and used kit lens for $300. I am sure someone with a p&s can make terrific shots. There are many variables into a great shot. Jul 05 12 10:43 pm Link Michael Fryd wrote: totaly agreed. Jul 05 12 10:52 pm Link Mirror With A Memory wrote: Agreed. You do not use a hammer to change a spare tire. Jul 05 12 10:57 pm Link Eric Liffmann wrote: Yes, but always with a Zeiss Ikon 50mm 1,5 Sonnar in Leica thread mount. The early Contax bodies were not reliable but the lenses were superior in his (and many people's) opinion. Jul 05 12 11:03 pm Link |
