login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > You must have a really great camera? Search   Reply
12345last
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,649
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


Ok we have all heard this and there have been rants on here before about it... I must say that however after shooting with a D800 with a highend Nikon Lens. I can visually see how much better the images are vs. a lower end setup.

So while a good camera alone will not make a great picture it sure does help!

I shot this over the weekend on a D800. Yes it is retouched to reflect my style, but right out of  the camera with only some exposure correction it looked really good.

It was also really nice having 36mp to work with I can see all kinds of great cropping coming from the images I shot.

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/130212/02/511a1dba626a3_m.jpg

The Bottom line is equipment will not make the image but good equipment can make you better if you are already good.
Feb 12 13 05:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Select Models
Posts: 35,301
Upland, California, US


You must have a really great camera?

Yep... the D600 is a pretty sweet rig... BUT... it pales in comparison to my mad skillz... lol

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v330/GaryAbigt/PoW5_zpsf549cf88.jpg

Only I am the 'Chuck Norris of Model Photography'... details on the MM page... wink
Feb 12 13 05:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Dan K Photography
Posts: 5,409
STATEN ISLAND, New York, US


what would be interesting is if next time you shoot with your old set up as well and we can see what the same shot with both setups would look like.
Feb 12 13 05:42 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,649
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


Dan K Photography wrote:
what would be interesting is if next time you shoot with your old set up as well and we can see what the same shot with both setups would look like.

I should have done that. I had my D7000 there with me as a back up. But I was pressed for time with a MUA and Hair Styist on the clock and running behind.

Next time.

Feb 12 13 05:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Paul Waring
Posts: 93
Liverpool, England, United Kingdom


great chefs are only where they are today because of a quality stove
Feb 12 13 05:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5,078
Catskill, New York, US


There's no doubt that gear matters. I have a D7000 and when I rent a pro lens like the 24-70 or 70-200 it's a world of difference.

The images are literally night and day. Oh I should mention that I normally shoot with the kit 18-70, a 50mm 1.8 which everyone knows is amazing and I have an 18-200 which is decent as well.
Feb 12 13 05:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
J O H N A L L A N
Posts: 9,734
Santa Ana, California, US


CastModels wrote:
great chefs are only where they are today because of a quality stove

But in their work they're typically using high-end equipment/tools to perform their craft. They're not using $5.00 grocery store pans, just so they can tout how "It's not the tool it's the chef". They respect what top of the line tools have to offer in the process of delivering the best they are capable of.

Feb 12 13 05:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Images by MR
Posts: 7,468
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:
There's no doubt that gear matters. I have a D7000 and when I rent a pro lens like the 24-70 or 70-200 it's a world of difference.

The images are literally night and day. Oh I should mention that I normally shoot with the kit 18-70, a 50mm 1.8 which everyone knows is amazing and I have an 18-200 which is decent as well.

It's because of the lens...  that's why investing in good glass is better then updating your body

Feb 12 13 06:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Salo
Posts: 8,015
Olney, Maryland, US


Images by MR wrote:
It's because of the lens...  that's why investing in good glass is better than updating your body

I wish that I COULD update my body!

Feb 12 13 06:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Model Starr Photography
Posts: 517
Madison, Alabama, US


CastModels wrote:
great chefs are only where they are today because of a quality stove

Have you ever cooked with cheap pots and pans and then cooked with high end pots and pans? It really does make a difference for those who know how to cook. Just like golf and photography.
If you give a golfer who sucks with cheap clubs, he'll still suck with expensive ones. If you give a great photographer a cheap camera, they'll still be great photographer. With a great camera, however, they'll be even better. By the way, really good pots and pans cook food more evenly and maintains a constant temperature throughout its surface. It's a wold of difference than cooking with cheap pots and pans.   :-)

Feb 12 13 06:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Aaron Lewis Photography
Posts: 5,078
Catskill, New York, US


Images by MR wrote:

It's because of the lens...  that's why investing in good glass is better then updating your body

Exactly, that was my point. I know the thread is more about the camera but my point was high end gear in general makes a huge difference.

Feb 12 13 06:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Fotografica Gregor
Posts: 4,065
Alexandria, Virginia, US


You should hear what they say to me after sex.....
Feb 12 13 06:21 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,649
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


Aaron Lewis Photography wrote:
Exactly, that was my point. I know the thread is more about the camera but my point was high end gear in general makes a huge difference.

That was my point also... It had $2K lens on it. One of the Nikon Holy Trinity.

All I know is I'm hooked I want this exact setup permanently!

As far as the Chefs and cooking... Have you ever watched TOP Chef and see how much changing equipment throws most Chefs game off?

Feb 12 13 06:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MiGel
Posts: 656
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany


Boy, this image sucks!
It was shot with a crappy EOS 40D and a shitty Sigma 10-20!

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/090126/09/497deed82af62_m.jpg

Thank god it's the light, models, perspective, theme, pov, clothes, location and make up that barely save it from being put in the bin immediately!
Feb 12 13 06:48 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
S W I N S K E Y
Posts: 24,315
Saint Petersburg, Florida, US


i dont you will ever realize the advantage of a 36mp sensor and ed glass on a computer screen...you would only see that benefit in a fairly large print.

http://i.imgur.com/m8TQi.png
Feb 12 13 06:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
End of the Road Studio
Posts: 156
Albuquerque, New Mexico, US


I don't have a great camera but I have a big one. A 12x20 inch film camera!
Feb 12 13 06:58 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,649
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


S W I N S K E Y wrote:
i dont you will ever realize the advantage of a 36mp sensor and ed glass on a computer screen...you would only see that benefit in a fairly large print.

That's exactly what I want it for large prints but yes I did see the difference on the screen looking at the full sized 36mp also in the images straight from the camera and into light room.

Feb 12 13 07:00 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,649
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


MiGel wrote:
Boy, this image sucks!
It was shot with a crappy EOS 40D and a shitty Sigma 10-20!

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/090126/09/497deed82af62_m.jpg

Thank god it's the light, models, perspective, theme, pov, clothes, location and make up that barely save it from being put in the bin immediately!

No one is saying that you can't make great images with low end equipment.  My most commented and some of my best images were shot on a D70 with a kit lens. But to be fair you left out of your list the post work in photoshop which is what really makes that image you are showing.

Feb 12 13 07:02 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
HHPhoto
Posts: 855
Atlanta, Georgia, US


You have a great camera.  Yes good gear helps.  However, most people wouldn't know what to do with good gear and would be better off using a point and shoot.

The chef comment still stands.

I prefer the retort:
"Your favorite author (fill in the blank) must have a great typewriter/work processor."
Feb 12 13 07:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,649
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


HHPhoto wrote:
You have a great camera.  Yes good gear helps.  However, most people wouldn't know what to do with good gear and would be better off using a point and shoot.

The chef comment still stands.

I prefer the retort:
"Your favorite author (fill in the blank) must have a great typewriter/work processor."

I agree. Learn to push the limits of your gear and then upgrade as needed.

Feb 12 13 07:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10,522
Gatineau, Quebec, Canada


when people are impressed by my kids I always answer that I have a really good penis smile
Feb 12 13 07:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MiGel
Posts: 656
Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany


Nico Simon Princely wrote:
No one is saying that you can't make great images with low end equipment.  My most commented and some of my best images were shot on a D70 with a kit lens. But to be fair you left out of your list the post work in photoshop which is what really makes that image you are showing.

You think so? I don't. It's the things I mentioned.
Here is the image right out of the raw converter (+watermarks):

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/6523/img9078x.jpg

My point is: If the image is striking, nobody really cares what equipment you used.
Does good equipment help? Yes. Does it need to be "the best"? No. Do 36 MP make the image? No. Not at all.

P.S.: I have a fairly large print of this image here on my wall. Looking totally fine.
Made the test, let a photographer guess which of my images came out of which camera (some are from a 1Ds III). He couldn't find out.

Feb 12 13 07:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lost Coast Photo
Posts: 2,674
Ferndale, California, US


Back in my photojournalism days I was talking to a colleague when an amateur photographer walked up, pointed at my friends top of the line camera, and said something about how he must be able to take awesome photos with that camera.

My friend looked at the amateurs entry level camera, and said "I'll trade you for 30 minutes and I'll bet I can take good photos with that one too."

The amateur declined to take the bet.

Side note: At least as photojournalists, we used top of the line cameras mostly because of durability under 6-day a week abuse. I ran tens of thousands of frames through my old Nikon FTn and it still worked even when most of the finish was worn to brass and it had been dropped twice. They were tools, and they had to perform. Good lenses helped too, but we would have found a way to get the shot even if forced to use something of lesser quality and cost.
Feb 12 13 07:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
-The Dave-
Posts: 8,585
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


It's just another tool in the tool box.  I love my D800 however there are times I reach for the D700 or even the D300 since they would do the job better.
Feb 12 13 07:45 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Schlake
Posts: 2,177
Socorro, New Mexico, US


AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
when people are impressed by my kids I always answer that I have a really good penis smile

When people are impressed by my 600mm f/4 IS L I tell them I have a really tiny penis.

The 600m f/4 is also a good example of when the gear really does make the picture, and not just the skill of the photographer.

Feb 12 13 07:48 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
RachelReilly
Posts: 1,699
Washington, District of Columbia, US


Lose that obnoxious watermark.
I can't even focus on the Beauty of the image!
Feb 12 13 07:53 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Farenell Photography
Posts: 17,849
Albany, New York, US


Nico Simon Princely wrote:
So while a good camera alone will not make a great picture it sure does help!

I shot this over the weekend on a D800. Yes it is retouched to reflect my style, but right out of  the camera with only some exposure correction it looked really good.

You've just contradicted yourself.

You start out thanking what kind of camera equipment you used but then you allude to it being straight out of the camera. So what your saying its not your camera equipment you should be thanking but your knowledge of the lighting & how you executed it.

Feb 12 13 07:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gary Melton
Posts: 6,335
Dallas, Texas, US


What?  We've gone nearly a whole page and I haven't seen anyone invoke "pin-hole camera" or "Andy Warhol" yet?

Gimmeafriggin' break people...equipment DOES make a difference!
Feb 12 13 08:04 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
eekimelphoto
Posts: 867
Longboat Key, Florida, US


HHPhoto wrote:
You have a great camera.  Yes good gear helps.  However, most people wouldn't know what to do with good gear and would be better off using a point and shoot.

The chef comment still stands.

I prefer the retort:
"Your favorite author (fill in the blank) must have a great typewriter/work processor."

I prefer the old school thought "Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it."

Feb 12 13 08:09 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
photo212grapher
Posts: 1,538
Saint Louis, Missouri, US


Nico Simon Princely wrote:
--snip--

It was also really nice having 36mp to work with I can see all kinds of great cropping coming from the images I shot.

--snip

Great equipment does give you additional options that the lesser stuff cannot. The OP can make several different croppings of the same image to give different looks. At 36mp, his original image could be cropped to a great headshot or a full figure.

It is the reason we all keep buying new camera bodies. If it were not partly equipment (and knowing how to use them), we'd be buying 5-10 year old DSLRs off Craigslist for a fraction of the cost.

Feb 12 13 08:16 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
-The Dave-
Posts: 8,585
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


RachelReilly wrote:
Lose that obnoxious watermark.
I can't even focus on the Beauty of the image!

Be nice, Thx

Feb 12 13 08:21 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Hero Foto
Posts: 878
Phoenix, Arizona, US


Im certain that those locally sourced ingredients and seafood had absolutely nothing to do with that fabulous meal ... it was all that equipment ... no way that meal could have been prepared with some leaves on some coals in a fire right on the beach ... with a pocket knife and possibly some hot rocks w/ sea salt made right there on the beach from boiled off sea water ...

amateurs ...
Feb 12 13 08:21 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Hero Foto
Posts: 878
Phoenix, Arizona, US


DP
Feb 12 13 08:24 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Raoul Isidro Images
Posts: 5,930
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


When I show them the camera that made the shots, they wont believe me.

They won't believe it came from the DMC-FT20 aka DMC-TS20 that's always in my shirt pocket...

(taken from the window of a shakey and vibrating helicopter)

http://sphotos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/734804_490405124348999_969930550_n.jpg

Blow up detail from the same file image:
http://sphotos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/72630_493367140719464_1303458792_n.jpg

Details Here:
http://500px.com/photo/25804393

.
Feb 12 13 08:30 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Macapodi
Posts: 286
New York, New York, US


As a personal challenge, I bought a point and shoot, small sensor Fuji X10 last year and committed to constraining myself and shooting my personal work with it (I otherwise shoot with a D800 and D3 for work). I'm at the point now where I will frequently use it for paid work, as long as creative goals and output requirements aren't compromised by it's inherent limitations.

What I've learned with my little experiment is that a lot of photographers (including myself) are seriously over-equipped for what they shoot. It's kinda halted my gear acquisition syndrome. I still love my D800 and primes of course... but carrying only an X10 in your pocket on the subway on your way to a shoot instead of a roller full of glass and camera is just so damn cool. It's given me an even greater sense of confidence in my creative flexibility.

Gear is awesome, but 9 times out of 10, it's the person behind it who's the bottleneck in creating better images.
Feb 12 13 08:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Srefis Limited
Posts: 960
Asheville, North Carolina, US


Nico Simon Princely wrote:
Ok we have all heard this and there have been rants on here before about it... I must say that however after shooting with a D800 with a highend Nikon Lens. I can visually see how much better the images are vs. a lower end setup.

So while a good camera alone will not make a great picture it sure does help!

I shot this over the weekend on a D800. Yes it is retouched to reflect my style, but right out of  the camera with only some exposure correction it looked really good.

It was also really nice having 36mp to work with I can see all kinds of great cropping coming from the images I shot.

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/130212/02/511a1dba626a3_m.jpg

The Bottom line is equipment will not make the image but good equipment can make you better if you are already good.

Yea, I'd love to see the comparison of this same photo taken on a disposable 35mm rite aid camera...

Feb 12 13 08:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Chuckarelei
Posts: 9,250
Seattle, Washington, US


Fotografica Gregor wrote:
You should hear what they say to me after sex.....

Cheap slut is no match for high priced whore?

Feb 12 13 08:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Srefis Limited
Posts: 960
Asheville, North Carolina, US


Jon Macapodi wrote:
As a personal challenge, I bought a point and shoot, small sensor Fuji X10 last year and committed to constraining myself and shooting my personal work with it (I otherwise shoot with a D800 and D3 for work). I'm at the point now where I will frequently use it for paid work, as long as creative goals and output requirements aren't compromised by it's inherent limitations.

What I've learned with my little experiment is that a lot of photographers (including myself) are seriously over-equipped for what they shoot. It's kinda halted my gear acquisition syndrome. I still love my D800 and primes of course... but carrying only an X10 in your pocket on the subway on your way to a shoot instead of a roller full of glass and camera is just so damn cool. It's given me an even greater sense of confidence in my creative flexibility.

Gear is awesome, but 9 times out of 10, it's the person behind it who's the bottleneck in creating better images.

Some are NSFW:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8512/8463 … 03a5_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8106/8464 … b738_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8098/8452 … 1b45_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8225/8452 … 281a_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8189/8441 … ebff_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8351/8439 … 5d68_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8363/8435 … 95e9_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8195/8417 … acd2_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8364/8417 … 6d10_h.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8189/8129 … 6d74_h.jpg

I love these shots by the way.

Maybe your next challenge should be a Holga. smile

Feb 12 13 08:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
R Michael Walker
Posts: 11,957
Costa Mesa, California, US


Images by MR wrote:

It's because of the lens...  that's why investing in good glass is better then updating your body

NOPE..you need both in the digital world. I MIGHT say the lens is most important (Aside from the Nikon D800) but a crappy body with a great lens is going to hold you back. Not that a crappy lens on a great body is a good scenario either. You need both. And then some talent to use the great gear to your advantage.

Feb 12 13 08:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
YZF Jeff
Posts: 244
Statesboro, Georgia, US


the more you expect from your body and lens the more you have to pay for the results.

if you take shots that require less from the body and lens, you can get great results for less money.

if you take shots that require 1/1000 at f/1.4 at ISO 12800, you just might have to spend more money to get that shot, or you are simply limited to a lesser quality shot.

back in reality, sharp primes and even good zooms can be had at reasonable prices, bodies have been 'good enough' for some time now, and you can always add light with flash to keep your ISO down. or just shoot in more light than sunset.

from my perspective the only reason to pay more is for the ability to shoot lower noise low light photos, and even then everything is a compromise. If you shoot f/1.4 your depth of field is shallow, if you shoot ISO 51200 you lose dynamic range and add noise, and if you shoot too slow a shutter speed you add motion blur. not to mention AF performance in negative EV situations and lens/AF combo's that hunt for focus.

so yeah in reality there's hardly an excuse not to get good results with relatively inexpensive gear in ideal situations. that's where the guy behind the camera becomes the ONLY variable.
Feb 12 13 09:02 pm  Link  Quote 
12345last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers