If you don't shoot Canon or Nikon...

Arpe · 03-08-2012, 08:41 PM

Yep your K20D AF IS awful for sport, I had one and did sport with it. Then a K-7, a bit better. Now a Nikon D300s, vast improvement.

Ratmagiclady · 03-08-2012, 11:19 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by tranq78

The men & women who are in the trades and have to own their own tools had this figured out a long time ago.
As to the argument that gear must be compatible for workflow purposes... that logic has already been suitably trashed in this thread.

Have we not figured this out yet? I was shooting Canon when Canon was the poor cousin for anything but sports, (when shooting sports meant you had to have skills like focusing and reloading)

There are matters of degree, but if the average passerby doesn't see competence and maybe therefore think whatever's in your hands must be just the right awesome thing for the job, it doesn't matter *what* nameplate is up front. Superficialities do actually get silly in the 'pro' world, but the fact is, if you don't look like you know what you're doing with a P&S, a D700 will not help you, either. People do not know the difference. My first digital, people were 'Where do you get a special camera like that,' and I was like, 'Actually, you can get better than this model up at Wal-mart for a couple bills. I like em though"

Brand-snobbery's been around for ages. People used to see me with my old rig and say, 'You can't shoot this gig with that, missy,' and I'd just be like, 'That's not what he says...' point elsewhere and be gone by the time they looked back.

Whatever, you know? Status BS. Sure sign of a poser was always "I want the pro brand." 'For what, job, sir?'

Yadda, yadda.

Kinda like Pentax's still-not-there automated flash system.... People wanted a 'pro flash' it'd be the 283 or 285... not a compurtterized thing that cost like a good lens. 'Why' It passes the drop test.' ' What's the drop test?' 'If you drop it on the floor are you losing money tonight?' Yaknow?

And callme a crotchety old cripple, but AF is a crutch, anyway. Just give me an accurate focusing screen and I'll turn AF on when I need it. *creak* Rule One: Get the shot. I don't need 18 frames a second, I just need a moment. And a followup.

magkelly · 03-09-2012, 01:46 AM

My first teacher out on the west coast is at the top of his field. He's been a photographer for almost as long as I've been alive and he's mostly a Pentax person as it happens. On his own I doubt he'd ever use anything else, but it's a fact that he does also have a Nikon (okay several) and at least one Canon in his enormous gear storage area. Also a few others, some Leica, I think, but that's because he's not a man who likes to be limited by anything let alone gear. His big thing is a camera it's just the tool that gets a photographer the shot he or she wants. If a client prefers a certain type of camera than so be it. He uses whatever, even if he thinks they're just being camera snobs. He may roll his eyes but he'll do it. Then again he has the money to go there if he needs to too.

Different parts of the photography industry tend to want different gear. Some parts they're very tolerant of just about any professional level camera that gets the job done so long as you can hand them a tif, jpeg or raw file as they case may be they don't really care what you use. Other places will check out to you the gear they want you to use or request that you buy it. Do they really need to go there, maybe not, but it's their job, their prerogative, and in the end it's all about how badly you want the job isn't it?

There was a time when Pentax gear was almost ubiquitous in certain fields. But the needs of those fields, those jobs have changed a lot with the times. How many city news people do you know now that are even using a DSLR versus a video camera now? Not nearly as many as there once were. A lot of what we see in the newspaper these days is photographs from video stills. You don't see nearly as many paparazzi with regular cameras now either. They're all going to video cams. School pics, driver's license pics, et all, it's almost all computer cams. Even your garden variety mall portrait studios are using what amounts to big box computer cameras now. I went to apply to one of those places a while back and I was totally turned off by what they considered portrait photography. Did it get the job done? I suppose but it's not what I'd consider real photography...

Bottom line you have to look at the needs of the part of the industry that you want to work most in and buy what your budget can afford accordingly. For me using Pentax gear isn't an issue but I'm not dealing with working with a large firm all the time either. If and when I ever do I'm not going to cry foul if they want me to buy a Nikon set up. It may just be necessary, like having a certain laptop is for certain jobs, whatever. I'll somehow manage the second set up and use it for as long as I am with them, then sell it if I ever stop. I'm not giving up my K-x anytime soon, or my dream of owning a K-5 or whatever comes after that someday, but no, I wouldn't not use a Nikon if it's going to get me a lucrative job. For one day's job, no, I wouldn't I'd just rent, or borrow, but for a lot of work from the same company, yes, I'd get the set up they wanted ASAP. It only makes sense. I'd simply have a "company camera" and my own personal camera for a while. Preferably, I'd rather that they'd pay for it like a company car, but I'm a realist I know that's not likely in the case of camera gear. I'd just have to manage it, somehow, hopefully not to the point of having to sell my Pentax gear to realize it though, laugh.

My point is don't let your love of your gear stand in your way. No matter how good the camera is, no matter how much you love it, if 90% of the people doing your job are using another one, and the company you want to get the most work for wants a certain one then DO it. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face. More work means more gear, period, and even if you had to sell your favorite gear to get there, more work means that eventually you'll be able to buy more of the gear you really love. If you're not going to be making that much then I don't think it would be worth it anyway, but if you will be then there's not much standing in your way, except maybe brand loyalty, and that isn't all that important compared to steady, lucrative work, in a field you love, now is it? Use the right tool for the right job. Use the tool you prefer when you can, but if you can't then improvise, evaluate, and make a logical decision, not an emotional one. Remember, it's just a camera and they're just lenses. What is lost can be replaced. What's important is not losing an actual opportunity to do what you love for good pay so unless of course you're independently wealthy (apparently not) and can afford to ignore this job, and with it a steady paycheck... :P

normhead · 03-12-2012, 10:04 AM

Quote:

My point is don't let your love of your gear stand in your way. No matter how good the camera is, no matter how much you love it, if 90% of the people doing your job are using another one, and the company you want to get the most work for wants a certain one then DO it.

90% of the people doing something is an indication you won't stand out if you do what they're doing. The question here is if you want to work for a certain company. If it'sa requirement of the job then it's your decision. My first question though would be, what percentage of my pay check will go to cover the cost of the gear I need. If it's going to take you 6 months to pay off your gear, then you're being taken advantage of. The guys I know who do well in photography are in wedding photography, teaching friends of mine made more doing weddings part time than they did at their day jobs. And it paid for their Hassies. But, there is no need to work for someone else to do weddings. Another friend of mine would go to local golf tournaments and sell picture packages to participants. He'd make upwards of 3k for a weekends work. Then he discovered that by paying students $400 each for two of them, he didn't even have to take the pictures. He could do bit of work driving back and forth to the printers and make $2000 for himself while paying the students $800. So who do you want to be, the $400 guy or the $2,000 dollar guy. It seems ridiculous to me to have to invest thousands of dollars to be the $400 guy. But hey, that's just me.

03-08-2012, 11:19 PM - 1 Like	#32
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by tranq78 The men & women who are in the trades and have to own their own tools had this figured out a long time ago. As to the argument that gear must be compatible for workflow purposes... that logic has already been suitably trashed in this thread. Have we not figured this out yet? I was shooting Canon when Canon was the poor cousin for anything but sports, (when shooting sports meant you had to have skills like focusing and reloading) There are matters of degree, but if the average passerby doesn't see competence and maybe therefore think whatever's in your hands must be just the right awesome thing for the job, it doesn't matter what nameplate is up front. Superficialities do actually get silly in the 'pro' world, but the fact is, if you don't look like you know what you're doing with a P&S, a D700 will not help you, either. People do not know the difference. My first digital, people were 'Where do you get a special camera like that,' and I was like, 'Actually, you can get better than this model up at Wal-mart for a couple bills. I like em though" Brand-snobbery's been around for ages. People used to see me with my old rig and say, 'You can't shoot this gig with that, missy,' and I'd just be like, 'That's not what he says...' point elsewhere and be gone by the time they looked back. Whatever, you know? Status BS. Sure sign of a poser was always "I want the pro brand." 'For what, job, sir?' Yadda, yadda. Kinda like Pentax's still-not-there automated flash system.... People wanted a 'pro flash' it'd be the 283 or 285... not a compurtterized thing that cost like a good lens. 'Why' It passes the drop test.' ' What's the drop test?' 'If you drop it on the floor are you losing money tonight?' Yaknow? And callme a crotchety old cripple, but AF is a crutch, anyway. Just give me an accurate focusing screen and I'll turn AF on when I need it. creak Rule One: Get the shot. I don't need 18 frames a second, I just need a moment. And a followup. Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 03-08-2012 at 11:32 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do you shoot Canon or Nikon?	lurchlarson	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	11	10-24-2011 08:54 AM
Black & White I Don't Shoot Flowers. Here's One.	nate_b	Post Your Photos!	6	07-22-2011 12:34 AM
A quick filter question... don't shoot me	MSM	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	6	03-10-2011 04:41 AM
Don't Shoot Your Eye Out	Parallax	General Talk	5	11-28-2010 12:08 PM
Certain Canon lenses that don't have IS?	LeDave	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	17	03-15-2010 07:28 PM

03-08-2012, 08:41 PM	#31
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452	Yep your K20D AF IS awful for sport, I had one and did sport with it. Then a K-7, a bit better. Now a Nikon D300s, vast improvement.

03-09-2012, 01:46 AM	#33
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	My first teacher out on the west coast is at the top of his field. He's been a photographer for almost as long as I've been alive and he's mostly a Pentax person as it happens. On his own I doubt he'd ever use anything else, but it's a fact that he does also have a Nikon (okay several) and at least one Canon in his enormous gear storage area. Also a few others, some Leica, I think, but that's because he's not a man who likes to be limited by anything let alone gear. His big thing is a camera it's just the tool that gets a photographer the shot he or she wants. If a client prefers a certain type of camera than so be it. He uses whatever, even if he thinks they're just being camera snobs. He may roll his eyes but he'll do it. Then again he has the money to go there if he needs to too. Different parts of the photography industry tend to want different gear. Some parts they're very tolerant of just about any professional level camera that gets the job done so long as you can hand them a tif, jpeg or raw file as they case may be they don't really care what you use. Other places will check out to you the gear they want you to use or request that you buy it. Do they really need to go there, maybe not, but it's their job, their prerogative, and in the end it's all about how badly you want the job isn't it? There was a time when Pentax gear was almost ubiquitous in certain fields. But the needs of those fields, those jobs have changed a lot with the times. How many city news people do you know now that are even using a DSLR versus a video camera now? Not nearly as many as there once were. A lot of what we see in the newspaper these days is photographs from video stills. You don't see nearly as many paparazzi with regular cameras now either. They're all going to video cams. School pics, driver's license pics, et all, it's almost all computer cams. Even your garden variety mall portrait studios are using what amounts to big box computer cameras now. I went to apply to one of those places a while back and I was totally turned off by what they considered portrait photography. Did it get the job done? I suppose but it's not what I'd consider real photography... Bottom line you have to look at the needs of the part of the industry that you want to work most in and buy what your budget can afford accordingly. For me using Pentax gear isn't an issue but I'm not dealing with working with a large firm all the time either. If and when I ever do I'm not going to cry foul if they want me to buy a Nikon set up. It may just be necessary, like having a certain laptop is for certain jobs, whatever. I'll somehow manage the second set up and use it for as long as I am with them, then sell it if I ever stop. I'm not giving up my K-x anytime soon, or my dream of owning a K-5 or whatever comes after that someday, but no, I wouldn't not use a Nikon if it's going to get me a lucrative job. For one day's job, no, I wouldn't I'd just rent, or borrow, but for a lot of work from the same company, yes, I'd get the set up they wanted ASAP. It only makes sense. I'd simply have a "company camera" and my own personal camera for a while. Preferably, I'd rather that they'd pay for it like a company car, but I'm a realist I know that's not likely in the case of camera gear. I'd just have to manage it, somehow, hopefully not to the point of having to sell my Pentax gear to realize it though, laugh. My point is don't let your love of your gear stand in your way. No matter how good the camera is, no matter how much you love it, if 90% of the people doing your job are using another one, and the company you want to get the most work for wants a certain one then DO it. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face. More work means more gear, period, and even if you had to sell your favorite gear to get there, more work means that eventually you'll be able to buy more of the gear you really love. If you're not going to be making that much then I don't think it would be worth it anyway, but if you will be then there's not much standing in your way, except maybe brand loyalty, and that isn't all that important compared to steady, lucrative work, in a field you love, now is it? Use the right tool for the right job. Use the tool you prefer when you can, but if you can't then improvise, evaluate, and make a logical decision, not an emotional one. Remember, it's just a camera and they're just lenses. What is lost can be replaced. What's important is not losing an actual opportunity to do what you love for good pay so unless of course you're independently wealthy (apparently not) and can afford to ignore this job, and with it a steady paycheck... :P

03-12-2012, 10:04 AM	#34
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: My point is don't let your love of your gear stand in your way. No matter how good the camera is, no matter how much you love it, if 90% of the people doing your job are using another one, and the company you want to get the most work for wants a certain one then DO it. 90% of the people doing something is an indication you won't stand out if you do what they're doing. The question here is if you want to work for a certain company. If it'sa requirement of the job then it's your decision. My first question though would be, what percentage of my pay check will go to cover the cost of the gear I need. If it's going to take you 6 months to pay off your gear, then you're being taken advantage of. The guys I know who do well in photography are in wedding photography, teaching friends of mine made more doing weddings part time than they did at their day jobs. And it paid for their Hassies. But, there is no need to work for someone else to do weddings. Another friend of mine would go to local golf tournaments and sell picture packages to participants. He'd make upwards of 3k for a weekends work. Then he discovered that by paying students $400 each for two of them, he didn't even have to take the pictures. He could do bit of work driving back and forth to the printers and make $2000 for himself while paying the students $800. So who do you want to be, the $400 guy or the $2,000 dollar guy. It seems ridiculous to me to have to invest thousands of dollars to be the $400 guy. But hey, that's just me.