[reeftool]

There are a lot of pro photographers using aps-c cameras. I personally know 2 that are using Nikon D300's who won't give them up and a local newspaper reporter who carries a Panasonic Lumix P&S because he's sick of lugging around that @#%%*&$ DSLR as he calls it. Professionals shouldn't be confused with wannabe snobs. The end result is all that matters. I've been a fleet mechanic for over 40 years professionally and have a wide assortment of tools from just about every brand. I have as much stuff from Harbor Freight as from Snap-On and if the cheap Harbor Freight tool does the job, then that's what I'll buy.

Generally, a tool is considered "professional" if it is built to hold up to heavy use and a moderate amount of abuse. A $39 saw will cut just the same a a $139 saw but the framing crew carpenter who is using his saw all day will burn the cheap one up in a few months while the "professional" grade should hold up for a few years. The same is true for the professional photographer. A sports photographer could easily shoot 1000 shots a day and the "professional" spec cameras have features and durability to hold up to that kind of use. Just about every DSLR today from the all plastic entry models on up are capable of stunning shots. For me, I just want something that won't break if I get caught in the rain and won't fall apart in the saddlebags on my Harley. It's a Pentax.

[jatrax]

There is a fine line between trades, which were controlled by medieval guilds and later unions (following an Apprentice / Craftsman / Master progression) and professions (arising out of university degrees following a Bachelor / Master / Doctor progression) and generally controlled by Professional Associations and Federal regulatory bodies. Such controlling bodies serve as barriers to entry by the untrained and uninitiated and limit supply of practioners, thus supporting wages and fees.

Didn't mean to step on your toes. I do understand the difference between the 'trades' and the 'professions'. I was just trying to illustrate that the best carpenter I ever knew cared absolutely nothing about his tools, only the quality of his work.

There are two definitions of 'professional':
1) of, relating to, or connected with a profession
and
2) a person engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime

I was, perhaps loosely, using the second as I assumed that's what we were discussing since there is no (as far as I know) professional test/license for photography.

[PJ1]

I agree that to be considered a professional photographer you must be making a substantial part of your income from photography. That means that you must have clients who want to purchase your images. What you use to take those images is not necessarily part of the equation. I have read on another thread here that some people have had clients who insisted that they must use FF or whatever. But those clients are not coming to buy an image from photo stock. They are engaging services, such as for a wedding, which is only part of the professional field. I am in the camp that says that the images that sell and the quantities that are sold are what makes the professional photographer.

[Winder]

I just read the highly annoying "Sorry Pentax is not enough thread..." (mercifully closed), and I am pissed off. So you have to use Nikon full frame (or any full frame) now to be considered a professional! I want to call BS on that.

We're getting into arguments now with the full frame crowd that are comparable to this: Your 9mm pistol isn't enough, you need a 30-06 rifle with a scope to be a proper assassin. This is so stupid. The message is: you gotta have this or that high caliber gun to play with the big boys..... It's not only silly but just not true. What about us pistoleros who like a smaller high quality weapon?

It's early days. I have not used the K-3 but the samples I've seen are more than what I would consider professional quality. I have been freelance since 1984 and the K-3 is a real temptation.

What would it take for you to consider yourself a professional? I mean, besides a load of lucrative jobs and a $50,000 camera. I'm just curious.

I never have understood why this question needs to be ask. Is there any other profession in the world where people ask this question.

If I asked "What does it take to be a professional landscaper"? Professional mechanic?

If the majority of your income is derived from photography then that is your profession. It doesn't matter if you use an old Brownie or a Leica S2.

I have a friend who is a nurse. That is her full-time job with benefits, but she also has a real estate license and sells a few homes a year. Nursing is her profession, not real estate.

I have rebuilt 3 Ford 302 engines and 2 Ford 400 engines for people who paid me, but I'm not a professional mechanic or engine builder. Just because I freelance occasionally and rebuild a motor or transmission doesn't make me a professional mechanic.

[Fogel70]

One of the biggest difference between amateur and pro, is that pros usually aren't as obsessed in the gear.
For pros the camera is just a another tool to get the job done, not a holy relic to be worshiped.

[alamo5000]

A pro is someone who sees photography as art, not a technical game of gizmos. I know a few people who I consider 'professional' and all of them have been in, had photos in, or were featured themselves in the likes of Nat Geo or whatever. They are recognized.

I guess you could have more than one category of 'professional'... your local guy who shoots weddings is one thing... he or she might earn a very decent living off of shooting weddings.... that is one type of professional... then you have other people who do other things...

From what I have seen is once people reach a certain level they have a weird level of demand on equipment. On one hand they can use a $15 throw away film camera and shoot better pictures than I do with a DSLR...on the other hand they can tell exactly how 'well' a camera is designed... how well it functions... how well things like AF work... etc etc... and they can tell minute differences...

At the same time almost all of them view gear as TOOLS to get the job done. Your mechanic might swear by Stanley screwdrivers, but he can probably get by on another brand. That said, if you gave the best of the best first crack at everything on the market.... they would probably buy/own/use almost one of everything that meets their basic needs. Canon for lens selection, Nikon for AF, and so on and so forth... where Pentax fits in there... well they don't yet... at least not to many.

Also most of the 'pros' are not independently wealthy, nor do they make a ton of money even despite being at the top of their game... once they invest in gear (IE lenses) then it becomes a sheer business proposition on profitability as to what they use. They buy gear 9 times out of 10 with their own money. Most are not brand loyal as much as one might imagine. They can (and do) see the strengths and weaknesses to each type of setup or particular brands.

[Joojoo2010]

Pro means to me person who is very good in skills and have serious attitude to work. Work not hobby.

Paper of educations does not garantie enough these days...actually i have 2 years study diploma in photography school, but cos i do not work as photographer i do not think myself as pro...but my skills is near pro level. On the other hand there is people who work as photographer but not know much but they still manage to make their living. But i would not call them pro...yet.

[Col]

A pro to me? Is the guy who, whilst I'm photographing a rare bird, will happily push in front on me to get his shot.

[eaglem]

A pro to me? Is the guy who, whilst I'm photographing a rare bird, will happily push in front on me to get his shot.

Wouldn't that be a dead ex pro?

[Col]

Wouldn't that be a dead ex pro?

Unfortunately I've only got 1.87Kg of K5 & DA*300 and they've generally got 5.26Kg of 1Dx and EF 600mm f4 L IS II USM.

[snake]

I just read the highly annoying "Sorry Pentax is not enough thread..." (mercifully closed), and I am pissed off. So you have to use Nikon full frame (or any full frame) now to be considered a professional! I want to call BS on that.

We're getting into arguments now with the full frame crowd that are comparable to this: Your 9mm pistol isn't enough, you need a 30-06 rifle with a scope to be a proper assassin. This is so stupid. The message is: you gotta have this or that high caliber gun to play with the big boys..... It's not only silly but just not true. What about us pistoleros who like a smaller high quality weapon?

It's early days. I have not used the K-3 but the samples I've seen are more than what I would consider professional quality. I have been freelance since 1984 and the K-3 is a real temptation.

What would it take for you to consider yourself a professional? I mean, besides a load of lucrative jobs and a $50,000 camera. I'm just curious.

My advice is to stop reading if these useless discussions bother you and don't call for censorship.

You're not paid by Ricoh/Pentax to defend them, they are not your "team", they are not as upset about this as you, so you have no reason to get more upset than them. They have their business plan and that's that.

Now if you have professional aspirations, you have two choices:

-produce undeniably professional work with your Pentax
-get what the industry demands, which is a full frame (and this is false, in reality)

You're saying you're a freelancer since 1984, so none of this should worry you in the least. This is consumerism, most of these ramblings are coming from consumerists, not photographers. They are mostly spec-sheet photographers and gearheads. If it's not with this gadget, it would be something else.

[richard balonglong]

Professional is being in a profession, being in a paid occupation, especially one that involves prolonged training, formal but sometimes also informal qualification, and proper set/s of skills...
But the term 'professional' is being misunderstood and is used for marketing purposes to define someone or something who/that can do a very very good job...
But how can we "properly" define different kinds of photographers? Well, there are many... One is, if we define someone who is really really good in photography, paid or not, he/she is called expert. How about those who enjoys photography as hobby? It's simple, they're hobbyist. What if one hobbyist is really really good? Well, they automatically called expert.

Cheers!

[Barry Pearson]

What would it take for you to consider yourself a professional? I mean, besides a load of lucrative jobs and a $50,000 camera. I'm just curious.

I'm not a professional photographer. (I'm a Chartered Professional in two other fields, but that is irrelevant here). I have pre-ordered the K-3 because I want the best results I can get from my investment.

The only people I know personally who use top-end Canon and Nikon cameras (1D X, etc) are hobbyist photographers (in photographic societies).

But I know a professional photographer who recently upgraded from a K-7 to a K-5IIs.

[RonHendriks1966]

1. Someone with a photografical education.
2. Someone who works for money.
3. Knows the difference between a hobby and work.
4. Is never a fanboy.
5. Makes appointments and sticks to them.
6. Has back-up plans for all his work.
7. Can deliver to the customers need and exceeds them.
8. Will deliver crappy images when someone asks for them and pays for them.
9. Is good in networking.
10. Knows where to stand to get his image and never lets anyone in his way coming.
11. Is part of some pressagency or larger groupe.
12. Has enough gear to do the job and buys stuff or rents it when needed.
13. Has a dresscode that suits the job.
14. Knows that his role is to be in the background, not disturbing the scene.
15. and then some more.....

A pro is (in random order)

To be honest with my yellow brick I don't qualify for many off these rules........

[jogiba]

Looks like full frame is the way to go for pro sports photographers.