[biz-engineer]

What is this crap? Aren't D6xx, D8xx, D750, D7xxx, 5D familly, 6D, 7D-II not truely pro camera? If we were to count all the pro and how many do have camera with on board flash and how many don't, I'am sure the camp with on board flash would win by a huge margin. Useless ? Maybe. You can discuss it. But it is here.

You have the PRO photographers specialized in sports , using a D4s or a 1Dx. I know one over here living 100% from photography (and others using 645z, Phase One MF or Mamiya MF for studio like shots and fashion).
5DII, 5DII, 6D, D610, D750, D810 are... I don't know how to say it... for amateurs who want to look like pros, or small pros, but in fact, a lot of the said "pro" are actually having another job, because even if they sell something, to get a decent salary out of photography, you need to be a "PRO" in upper case. And I doubt PRO are using on board flash. When Mr PRO gets a contract with Red-bull, they are talking about 5000 euros for 4 days of work (prepare the event by talking to different actors, going there and identifying the best spots, going at the event, and post-processing, and prints).

[Nicolas06]

You have the PRO photographers specialized in sports , using a D4s or a 1Dx. I know one over here living 100% from photography (and others using 645z, Phase One MF or Mamiya MF for studio like shots and fashion).
5DII, 5DII, 6D, D610, D750, D810 are... I don't know how to say it... for amateurs who want to look like pros, or small pros, but in fact, a lot of the said "pro" are actually having another job, because even if they sell something, to get a decent salary out of photography, you need to be a "PRO" in upper case. And I doubt PRO are using on board flash. When Mr PRO gets a contract with Red-bull, they are talking about 5000 euros for 4 days of work (prepare the event by talking to different actors, going there and identifying the best spots, going at the event, and post-processing, and prints).

Man, you see the pro with lot of glamour and specialized area (sports/action). That's for sure 1 use case. Even if you'll find a pro on the olympics that use a large format camera with film. No on board flash, sure

Many pro make money from weddings, taking some shoots for the city journal, providing picture for a company internal journal, handling identity shoots for passport with stupid reglementation in term of format, people that take product shoots, people that are taking porno pictures/video... people that take pictures of you on the beach, while on cruise or while you are running and then sell you the photo.

To think they all use that D4s or 1Dx or that they would benefit from it one bit from their pratice is naive.

Somebody said that there is no pro gear, only professionnals photographers. I tend to agree.

On this forum you'll find pros that make quite great shoots with their K5... that's just how it is. The amount of money a pro is putting in is not even that linked to the quality of the shoot they produce but also if they have the good social skills and marketing skills.

Trying to put segration by the gear is bit stupid and the principal interrests are if you are selling gear yourself as a manufacturer or as a pro if you can't distinguish yourself from the quality of your work and need every possible help.

[rawr]

Probably the largest population of full-time professional photographers in most countries are wedding photographers.

No wedding photog I have ever seen uses sports cameras like the 1Dx or D4s. It's all 5D3 or D700 or D800.

[biz-engineer]

Man, you see the pro with lot of glamour and specialized area (sports/action). That's for sure 1 use case. Many pro make money from weddings, taking some shoots for the city journal, providing picture for a company internal journal, handling identity shoots for passport with stupid reglementation in term of format, people that take product shoots, people that are taking porno pictures/video... people that take pictures of you on the beach, while on cruise or while you are running... To think they all use that D4s or 1Dx or that they would benefit from it one bit from their pratice is naive. Somebody said that there is no pro gear, only professionnals photographers. I tend to agree. On this forum you'll find pros that make quite great shoots with their K5... that's just how it is. Trying to put segration by the gear is bit stupid and the principal interrests are if you are selling gear yourself as a manufacturer or as a pro if you can't distinguish yourself from the quality of your work.

So, how do you define a "pro"? Did you mean professional?

[btnapa]

You have the PRO photographers specialized in sports , using a D4s or a 1Dx. I know one over here living 100% from photography (and others using 645z, Phase One MF or Mamiya MF for studio like shots and fashion).
5DII, 5DII, 6D, D610, D750, D810 are... I don't know how to say it... for amateurs who want to look like pros, or small pros, but in fact, a lot of the said "pro" are actually having another job, because even if they sell something, to get a decent salary out of photography, you need to be a "PRO" in upper case. And I doubt PRO are using on board flash. When Mr PRO gets a contract with Red-bull, they are talking about 5000 euros for 4 days of work (prepare the event by talking to different actors, going there and identifying the best spots, going at the event, and post-processing, and prints).

May be you are right but from personal experience I can tell you that all the cameras you listed as non-PRO, are indeed good enough for PRO work. How do I know? Because I shot ad agency work with my Canon 10D and later a Canon 20D and I charged a lot more than 5,000 Euros for a 4 day work. My client was not interested in my camera brand or the MP count. They were interested in pictures that told their story.

If I had to do it today, my "non-PRO" K3 would do a great job. As a matter of fact I did a few assignments with the K3 and my client was thrilled with the results. Some of the pics were blown up to mega poster sizes for their trade show booth.

As a working pro, the challenge is not to spend all your hard earned money to get the latest and the greatest in gear. It is to spend the least amount of money to get results for which your clients are willing to pay. Sure I can use a 645Z to do the job but if the client is not willing to pay the "big buck," then a K3 will be more than sufficient.

[biz-engineer]

Nicolas was inferring that a builtin flash is useful to professional photographers because it is included in pro cameras such as D610, D750 and 6D. I don't know to what extent this inference is valid. A lot of thinks have changed in the last decade. Why did Pentax wait until now to design a FF camera? Why did they make a 645D and 645z before a full frame? Why Nikon made cost reduced entry level FF cameras such as D610 and D750, and why Canon followed with the 6D? In my opinion, built in flash is a commodity for when we do not have a external flash at hand and I do believe that a professional photographer would use an external flash rather than the built in flash. I'm not sure what is the goal in the argumentation that builtin flash is used by professionals.

[jatrax]

As a working pro, the challenge is not to spend all your hard earned money to get the latest and the greatest in gear. It is to spend the least amount of money to get results for which your clients are willing to pay. Sure I can use a 645Z to do the job but if the client is not willing to pay the "big buck," then a K3 will be more than sufficient.

Exactly. If it is a hobby, spend what you want, get what you want. But if it is a business each purchase should be justified against possible return. And you should only buy what is needed to do the job and make the client happy.

Why did they make a 645D and 645z before a full frame?

645 was a strategic move to take control of the medium format DSLR market before Sony or Canon decided to make a run at it. Anyone else entering that market now will have the same up hill battle that Ricoh has with a FF: an entrenched brand with a good value proposition and loyal user base. IMHO it was one of the smartest things I have seen Ricoh do so far.

Ask Pentax why they waited until now to design a FF camera?

Because they doubted they could make money at it? IMHO they are still on the fence about that. 645z gave them some confidence that it might be possible.

[biz-engineer]

That's why amateurs buy a 645z (they don't have to put it in their balance sheet) and pros are saving money on a second hand K-5IIs and old depreciated FA lenses, because it looks better in the balance sheet.

[hangman43]

Man, you see the pro with lot of glamour and specialized area (sports/action). That's for sure 1 use case. Even if you'll find a pro on the olympics that use a large format camera with film. No on board flash, sure

Many pro make money from weddings, taking some shoots for the city journal, providing picture for a company internal journal, handling identity shoots for passport with stupid reglementation in term of format, people that take product shoots, people that are taking porno pictures/video... people that take pictures of you on the beach, while on cruise or while you are running and then sell you the photo.

To think they all use that D4s or 1Dx or that they would benefit from it one bit from their pratice is naive.

Somebody said that there is no pro gear, only professionnals photographers. I tend to agree.

On this forum you'll find pros that make quite great shoots with their K5... that's just how it is. The amount of money a pro is putting in is not even that linked to the quality of the shoot they produce but also if they have the good social skills and marketing skills.

Trying to put segration by the gear is bit stupid and the principal interrests are if you are selling gear yourself as a manufacturer or as a pro if you can't distinguish yourself from the quality of your work and need every possible help.

How many wedding photographers have you ever seen use pop up flash that is on the camera or as that goes how many of any of the working professionals have you ever seen using on board flash

[tuco]

645 was a strategic move to take control of the medium format DSLR market before Sony or Canon decided to make a run at it.

The same move Pentax did with film? Pentax had 2 medium format offerings while Canon and Nikon had none.

And I think if Canon or Nikon do make a MFD camera, they might have an advantage. They don't have to use a film camera body with legacy glass registration distance thereby making perhaps a more compact MFD camera. And I doubt they will take so long to offer a lot more native MFD lenses. But who knows.

[K David]

Aren't D6xx, D8xx, D750, D7xxx, 5D familly, 6D, 7D-II not truely pro camera?

What can I say, I don't think of those cameras.

[jatrax]

it looks better in the balance sheet.

It looks better in our pocket as well. or on the rent check.................

And I think if Canon or Nikon do make a MFD camera, they might have an advantage. They don't have to use a film camera body with legacy glass registration distance thereby making perhaps a more compact MFD camera. And I doubt they will take so long to offer a lot more native MFD lenses. But who knows.

Possible, but I think Nikon and Canon will consider the market too small to mess with now. If Ricoh had not pushed out the 645z someone else might have been tempted. Now, I don't think so. Would Canon/Sony/Nikon do a better job with a new mount and registration distance? Maybe. But is there enough market to justify it? I'm guessing no. I think Ricoh pushed the 645z out to lock up that market or at least to make anyone else entering it think twice. Easy to jump into a vacuum, but if there are already established players in a niche market the numbers start to look bad.

[tuco]

It looks better in our pocket as well. or on the rent check.................

Possible, but I think Nikon and Canon will consider the market too small to mess with now. If Ricoh had not pushed out the 645z someone else might have been tempted. Now, I don't think so. Would Canon/Sony/Nikon do a better job with a new mount and registration distance? Maybe. But is there enough market to justify it? I'm guessing no. I think Ricoh pushed the 645z out to lock up that market or at least to make anyone else entering it think twice. Easy to jump into a vacuum, but if there are already established players in a niche market the numbers start to look bad.

It looks like most the 645Z shooters are also Canon owners. I bet they'd sell and use Canon's MFD in a heartbeat with Canon's pro service centers and all.

[monochrome]

And Ricoh had a lot of 645 lenses in inventory . . . . .

[jatrax]

It looks like most the 645Z shooters are also Canon owners.

I had not noticed that. Well, brand loyalty is fine. And a very good point about the service centers. Reviews of the 645z seem uniformly good, but at that price point you expect / deserve quality service and that is lacking, at least in the USA.

And Ricoh had a lot of 645 lenses in inventory . . . . .

Also a very good point. Like I said, pushing out the 645z was a brilliant strategic move. The other guys might catch up eventually but it made them a lot more cautious and likely sold Ricoh some of that warehouse full of MF glass