Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-10-2010, 06:53 AM   #196
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I am not sure why people have the impression that professional photographers have lots of excess cash to throw around on equipment. Average income for professional photographers is about 29,000 a year and 60 percent make less than 43000 dollars (this is in the US).

In my area (admittedly quite rural), most of the photographers shoot with Canon -- either 20D or 40D. Their lenses are quite old and they don't buy new equipment unless they absolutely need it. Certainly none are running out to buy D3x's or even full frame equipment.

My impression is that most of the upper end equipment is sold to wealthy amateurs.
If a pro photographer owns their photography business they are able to deduct their equipment expenses as a business expense which reduces their stated income. You also have to consider that some professional photographers may work for businesses and receive a salary for their income and use equipment that is owned by their employer.

In either case it is a lot easier to state expenses through above board transactions on new equipment through a retailer than it is to buy used gear off of craigslist for cash on the barrel head.

06-10-2010, 10:08 AM   #197
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
If a pro photographer owns their photography business they are able to deduct their equipment expenses as a business expense which reduces their stated income. You also have to consider that some professional photographers may work for businesses and receive a salary for their income and use equipment that is owned by their employer.

In either case it is a lot easier to state expenses through above board transactions on new equipment through a retailer than it is to buy used gear off of craigslist for cash on the barrel head.
This presumes that the cash flow is in place to buy the new equipment in the first place, and quite often this is a fallacy. Most professional photographers either work on their own, or work for small studios that may or may not be supplying equipment, and are generally working under very tight cashflow situations.
The % that have their equipment supplied to them is little more than a blip on the radar unless you take the kiosk photographers who work in department stores under consideration as professional photographers, which while technically is correct, in actuality is not.
06-10-2010, 11:33 AM   #198
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
This presumes that the cash flow is in place to buy the new equipment in the first place, and quite often this is a fallacy. Most professional photographers either work on their own, or work for small studios that may or may not be supplying equipment, and are generally working under very tight cashflow situations.
The % that have their equipment supplied to them is little more than a blip on the radar unless you take the kiosk photographers who work in department stores under consideration as professional photographers, which while technically is correct, in actuality is not.
You also have paparazzi,
photographers who work for newspapers, magazines, and websites,
advertising companies,
sports photographers,
in hollywood or other video media industries,
larger companies that cater to corporate photography needs,
internal PR and graphics departments (I work at a small company with about 200 employees and our graphics department has a very nice DSLR kit although they are not doing full time photography).

When I think self employed professional photographer I think someone you hire for a wedding. When I think a little bit higher on the food chain I see the small studio that also does family portraits and stuff. I think when you go beyond that you are probably talking about companies with a little more budget to throw around on different kinds of gear, have several employees as they need to cover larger events and multiple simultaneous events, setup gear, do lighting, etc...

While self employed photographers are probably indeed out gunned by well heeled amateurs because they typically price their services at a level where their customers can choose between hiring them for one day of photos or buying their own gear and taking years of photos.
06-10-2010, 06:46 PM   #199
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,243
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
If a pro photographer owns their photography business they are able to deduct their equipment expenses as a business expense which reduces their stated income. You also have to consider that some professional photographers may work for businesses and receive a salary for their income and use equipment that is owned by their employer.

In either case it is a lot easier to state expenses through above board transactions on new equipment through a retailer than it is to buy used gear off of craigslist for cash on the barrel head.
I agree that if they want to, they can write off both new and used equipment as expenses. I am just telling you that in my experience, they are much less likely to buy new equipment (whether you are talking about cameras, lenses, flashes, tripods, studio accessories) than the well heeled amateur. Each item serves a purpose and is replaced if necessary, but not just on a whim and not simply for some ephemeral desire for "better performance."

As long as they feel that they are satisfying their clients, they don't see the need to invest more.

06-10-2010, 07:33 PM   #200
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
As far as I know, Hoya/Pentax still accept orders from distributors for FA50/1.4 lens, but don't know how long it's gonna last.

Hopefully a digital version (w/o aperture ring, add SP coating ...) will come out soon.

Last edited by frank; 06-10-2010 at 07:48 PM.
06-10-2010, 07:49 PM   #201
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by frank Quote
As far as I know, Hoya/Pentax still accept orders from distributors for FA50/1.4 lens ...
Pentax Imaging (Pentax USA) still has them in stock and listed on the site and BH and Adorama still gets shipments from Hoya.
06-11-2010, 08:47 AM   #202
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
You also have paparazzi,
photographers who work for newspapers, magazines, and websites,
advertising companies,
sports photographers,
in hollywood or other video media industries,
larger companies that cater to corporate photography needs,
internal PR and graphics departments (I work at a small company with about 200 employees and our graphics department has a very nice DSLR kit although they are not doing full time photography).

When I think self employed professional photographer I think someone you hire for a wedding. When I think a little bit higher on the food chain I see the small studio that also does family portraits and stuff. I think when you go beyond that you are probably talking about companies with a little more budget to throw around on different kinds of gear, have several employees as they need to cover larger events and multiple simultaneous events, setup gear, do lighting, etc...

While self employed photographers are probably indeed out gunned by well heeled amateurs because they typically price their services at a level where their customers can choose between hiring them for one day of photos or buying their own gear and taking years of photos.
All you have done is listed off the people who buy cameras for about 5% (if that) of the pro photographers out there.
Self employed photography is a very competitive business. You'd realize this if you tried doing it.
I don't have the time or the will to educate you on this subject, so carry on in blissful ignorance.
I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread what the average pro makes per year. If this seems like a lot of money to you, move out of your mom's house and see what it costs to live in the real world.
06-11-2010, 10:12 AM   #203
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
All you have done is listed off the people who buy cameras for about 5% (if that) of the pro photographers out there.
Self employed photography is a very competitive business. You'd realize this if you tried doing it.
I don't have the time or the will to educate you on this subject, so carry on in blissful ignorance.
I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread what the average pro makes per year. If this seems like a lot of money to you, move out of your mom's house and see what it costs to live in the real world.
LOL I am just pointing out that your view of the market for photo equipment ignores that their are a lot of people and businesses who buy cameras and photo equipment outside of amateurs, families, and wedding photographers.

Because you mentioned living in your parents basement, I would throw another audience in for overpriced photo equipment "artists" or artist types that live off trust funds, their parents, or their spouse. Maybe they even earn $30K from their photography but they still have access to OPM and spend way beyond the means afforded by their photography sales.

I am probably one of those "well heeled amateurs" you refer to because I have a day job. I got a DSLR b/c we wanted to get nice pictures of our child and were turned off by our experience with wedding photos. From our experience with the wedding photographer we found that we paid a lot of money and what we got was someone who shot slightly above average photos and took some time to improve our favorite ones with photoshop compared to our friends who also took pictures with point and shoot cameras without any post processing. We were also turned off by the idea that all of these pictures of us were owned by the guy we hired and any prints we wanted needed to be ordered through him. When we looked into doing some family pictures, it was cheaper than the wedding ones but it was still expensive enough to where we looked at it this way:
we can hire a photographer and take about 200 pictures in one day and have 65 good ones (4x6) from which we will pick 5-10 to enlarge or
we can spend the same money on a camera that will give us 5000 pictures over a few years and even if we shoot at a rate where we get half as many good ones we would have 1600 snapshots to pick enlargements from and have a much greater variety of pictures from different points in time and places. We would also own all of the originals. I am fairly handy with GIMP and can make a picture nice enough in most cases and I have friends who are graphic artists who are better at photoshop than your average photographer who I can swap favors with to get fancier stuff done if I want.

I think the prices of equipment are getting to the point where unless you have a good enough technique that you can get published you will have a hard time justifying more than a couple hundred bucks and even then it is a tough sell because I don't think photographers add a huge amount of value over the results that can be achieved by yourself.

06-11-2010, 10:19 AM   #204
Veteran Member
MrPetkus's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 388
I think your comments regarding 1) your experience and impression of the average wedding/professional photographer and 2) your motivation for purchasing a DSLR are legitimate, well-said, and probably shared by an ever-growing number of enthusiastic amateurs.

QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
LOL I am just pointing out that your view of the market for photo equipment ignores that their are a lot of people and businesses who buy cameras and photo equipment outside of amateurs, families, and wedding photographers.

Because you mentioned living in your parents basement, I would throw another audience in for overpriced photo equipment "artists" or artist types that live off trust funds, their parents, or their spouse. Maybe they even earn $30K from their photography but they still have access to OPM and spend way beyond the means afforded by their photography sales.

I am probably one of those "well heeled amateurs" you refer to because I have a day job. I got a DSLR b/c we wanted to get nice pictures of our child and were turned off by our experience with wedding photos. From our experience with the wedding photographer we found that we paid a lot of money and what we got was someone who shot slightly above average photos and took some time to improve our favorite ones with photoshop compared to our friends who also took pictures with point and shoot cameras without any post processing. We were also turned off by the idea that all of these pictures of us were owned by the guy we hired and any prints we wanted needed to be ordered through him. When we looked into doing some family pictures, it was cheaper than the wedding ones but it was still expensive enough to where we looked at it this way:
we can hire a photographer and take about 200 pictures in one day and have 65 good ones (4x6) from which we will pick 5-10 to enlarge or
we can spend the same money on a camera that will give us 5000 pictures over a few years and even if we shoot at a rate where we get half as many good ones we would have 1600 snapshots to pick enlargements from and have a much greater variety of pictures from different points in time and places. We would also own all of the originals. I am fairly handy with GIMP and can make a picture nice enough in most cases and I have friends who are graphic artists who are better at photoshop than your average photographer who I can swap favors with to get fancier stuff done if I want.

I think the prices of equipment are getting to the point where unless you have a good enough technique that you can get published you will have a hard time justifying more than a couple hundred bucks and even then it is a tough sell because I don't think photographers add a huge amount of value over the results that can be achieved by yourself.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA50mm/1.7 lens (US) DSims Sold Items 6 04-15-2010 10:17 AM
Discontinued Lens List Russell-Evans Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 12-10-2009 12:13 PM
Lens are going to discontinued. vizjerei Pentax News and Rumors 63 12-08-2009 03:34 AM
10 Pentax DA lenses Discontinued ? wll Pentax News and Rumors 6 11-25-2009 12:10 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:21 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top