I don't care what gear you use...

CWyatt · 11-24-2010, 07:24 PM

... and neither should you. Hopefully this isn't too inflammatory. I just feel the need to say, seeing so many continuous threads about what lens is sharper than another, which camera is better than another, that these are simply tools - a means to an end. The final image is what matters. This is 99% your timing and composition, not whether you used a slightly sharper lens to shoot it than you had last week. The greats don't list what gear they used to capture the great images. They had what they had and they got the photo. I have taken better photos with the kit lens than I have with my nice sharp primes, and vice versa. Great photographers have taken great images using the most basic of equipment. Of course the tool matters, if you need that to capture the moment - and good gear Can help - but the emphasis should be very much on what you shoot. What matters is that you DO capture the moment. Gear is but a part of the role to get that image that has something to say.

The same could go for other technical considerations.
"What use is having a great depth of field if there is not an adequate depth of feeling?" - W. Eugene Smith

Use what you need to and be done with it! Thoughts?

Last edited by CWyatt; 11-24-2010 at 07:38 PM.

bimjo · 11-24-2010, 08:03 PM

I have a solution for you.

Step 1- pick a spot on a hard surface
Step 2- apply forehead vigorously
Step 3- repeat steps 1 & 2

Seriously, as long as there is more than one type equipment there will be the types of discussions that you bemoan.

It is what it is.

As to why these discussions take place I'll offer this- since I am not a machine rest or a very sturdy tripod I need all the help I can get when hand holding the camera to take pics. Higher ISO/faster shutter speed, shake reduction, faster/sharper glass… whatever is available at hand I'll gladly use.

Others may have differing reasons, but that's mine.

CWyatt · 11-24-2010, 08:07 PM

To clarify - I don't bemoan choosing good gear. I use a K-7 and fast prime because it has stabilisation, is fast and not too noticeable. However I don't discuss it all the time, list it continuously, and feel that is or isn't why I get my images I want.

Wheatfield · 11-24-2010, 08:28 PM

A gear oriented forum may not be the best place for you.
Some sort of photo sharing forum might work better for you.
The Pentax Discuss Mail List is very good, not so heavy on gear talk, but a lot of images get shown and talked about.

rhodopsin · 11-24-2010, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by CWyatt

... I have taken better photos with the kit lens than I have with my nice sharp primes, and vice versa. ...

Eh? I don't understand! (or maybe I do understand

)

Love the Dorothea Lange quote; very true in my experience!

Elva · 11-24-2010, 11:10 PM

Photography is 80% eye, 15% luck, 5% equipment. Do this exercise, get a point and shoot 4 or 4 MP digital camera, and a few photographers together, 5 subjects to photograph, one shot for each subject by each photographer. Then review the results, no photo shop allowed, all photos are revied stright from the camera, fixed lens 4 MP compact digital camera to be used and the sme camer used by everyone. This will show what I said by the first line.

Have fun if you do this.

Arpe · 11-24-2010, 11:56 PM

Originally posted by Elva

Photography is 80% eye, 15% luck, 5% equipment.

Unless you don't have your gear, then it's 100% the gear's fault!!

SpecialK · 11-25-2010, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by CWyatt

.Use what you need to and be done with it! Thoughts?

Discussed to death.

Some people list gear so others can (hopefully not) ask about it, or at least offer some evidence of knowing something about that which they speak.

Neither always works.

Mike Cash · 11-25-2010, 01:14 AM

PETA called and left a message. Something about abusing a dead horse.

Class A · 11-25-2010, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

A gear oriented forum may not be the best place for you.

+1

Regarding your question: There is no question that the most important factor in getting a great image sits behind the viewfinder.

However, there is also no denying that the potential output is limited by the tools. Sure, a good photographer can get good images with the limitations of mediocre gear or even use the limitations to their benefit. But the degrees of freedom will be limited nevertheless.

Isn't it true that the greats all had their gear preferences (i.e., they didn't take a "don't care" approach) and achieved mastery regarding the technical foundation of their craft?

Once someone has found the gear that suits their needs, they can leave a gearist forum. If their one goal is good photography that is. Another valid goal could be to keep talking about gear. I wouldn't judge the merit of these differing goals. They are just different.

**Lowell Goudge** · 11-25-2010, 07:43 AM

I have a couple of observations here, but I agree with most of the pther posts too

- this has been beaten to death already
- yes, the biggest thing impeeding great photos is the person directly behind the viewfinder,
- a technically oriented forum may not be the best enfironment for someone who does not care for gear discussions

BUT

one thing I do see a lot of here, is when people try to impose their gear on others.

I am probably just as guilty as the next person in this respect, because, we all have our biases. But I do try to explain not a spefic lens or set of lenses for exaample, but to explain the thought process people need to go through in designing a kit.

Same with cameras, there are still lots of great shots taken with first generation 6MP bodies. After all, as I sit here with my 22 inch 1680 x 1050 pixel monitor, and realize it can only display 1/4 of the frame from my *istD at 100% resolution, just how much resolution do you really need?

But sometimes gear has an advantage, and that advantage is important. Just go oout to shoot something with a K or M42 lens, and a flash, and you will realize just how important having an *istD is over a K10 or K7.

TTL flash beats the hell out of manual or Auto flash.

johnmflores · 11-25-2010, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by CWyatt

"What use is having a great depth of field if there is not an adequate depth of feeling?" - W. Eugene Smith

That is a fantastic quote! There's so much technically good but emotionally empty stuff out there. It's like plastic surgery - all surface and no depth.

Coeurdechene · 11-26-2010, 09:28 AM - **1 Like**

This is the third post i've read that has been labeled like abused topic, repost, etc..and i'm quite happy this does happen because if not people new, that are just browsing ramdomly in their spare time might not read or participate in this topics..i wasn't looking for it just stumbled across this topic..

Then gear discussion..i like to discuss my gear and find the tons of feedback of lenses i'm considering to buy, it's fun and usefull..maybe its some kind of onanism where we get pleasure from something that doesnt have to be trascendental, maybe we discuss so much our gear as a way of enjoiying it (not only using it has to be a source of pleasure..) and that doesn't mean that other aspects of fotography aren't discussed..You can always go and post your fotos and ask for critique or advice, or you can view other people's fotos (there is a section of the forum where people do that:P)..
And to finish this post reminded me of this guy, he was a hobo who roamed the streets with his toilet paper cardboard, box and tape camera and made some beautifull photos...captured great moments with that 3 cent camera...he died not long ago..i wish i could remember his name.. if someones knows him please remind me his name

r0ckstarr · 11-29-2010, 06:21 AM

I care.

newarts · 11-29-2010, 07:16 AM

It is MUCH easier to talk about things with quantitative measures (focal length, magnification, sharpness,etc) than things with qualitative measures (beauty, balance, emotional association, etc..)

I believe it is possible to quantify some of the more qualitative aspects of photography, but suggesting such usually results in a flood of objection.

The alternative is to whine about too much technical talk while making no attempt to contribute to critical discussion about qualitative aspects. Meanwhile I have no doubt that many artists have well developed internalized quantitative rules of how to assemble a qualitatively pleasing work - their difficulty in articulating those rules does not deny their existence....but boy do they hit the roof when I suggest sharing the rules by which they develop artistic works!

Perhaps as quantitative measures of image quality are publicly identified they will no longer be thought of as mysterious and therefore be removed from the emotionalist's hidden technological repertoire?

Dave

PS using a longer than normal lens for flattering portrait work is a good example of a technical technique based on/ influencing qualitative results; what's wrong with discussing this trick openly?

11-24-2010, 07:24 PM	#1
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	I don't care what gear you use... ... and neither should you. Hopefully this isn't too inflammatory. I just feel the need to say, seeing so many continuous threads about what lens is sharper than another, which camera is better than another, that these are simply tools - a means to an end. The final image is what matters. This is 99% your timing and composition, not whether you used a slightly sharper lens to shoot it than you had last week. The greats don't list what gear they used to capture the great images. They had what they had and they got the photo. I have taken better photos with the kit lens than I have with my nice sharp primes, and vice versa. Great photographers have taken great images using the most basic of equipment. Of course the tool matters, if you need that to capture the moment - and good gear Can help - but the emphasis should be very much on what you shoot. What matters is that you DO capture the moment. Gear is but a part of the role to get that image that has something to say. The same could go for other technical considerations. "What use is having a great depth of field if there is not an adequate depth of feeling?" - W. Eugene Smith Use what you need to and be done with it! Thoughts? Last edited by CWyatt; 11-24-2010 at 07:38 PM.

11-24-2010, 08:07 PM	#3
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291 Original Poster	To clarify - I don't bemoan choosing good gear. I use a K-7 and fast prime because it has stabilisation, is fast and not too noticeable. However I don't discuss it all the time, list it continuously, and feel that is or isn't why I get my images I want. Last edited by CWyatt; 11-24-2010 at 08:13 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Obama's health care law will increase the nation's health care costs	Artesian	General Talk	187	05-20-2010 10:18 AM
Streets Does He Care?	hockmasm	Photo Critique	8	05-18-2010 11:47 PM
Health Care for Everyone... NOT!!!!	Fl_Gulfer	General Talk	235	12-17-2009 06:40 AM
How we are going to do this? Health Care	Russell-Evans	General Talk	196	09-22-2009 06:23 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax gear for Canon gear	pingflood	Sold Items	13	01-23-2009 01:56 AM

11-24-2010, 08:03 PM	#2
bimjo Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Pasco, WA Posts: 967	I have a solution for you. Step 1- pick a spot on a hard surface Step 2- apply forehead vigorously Step 3- repeat steps 1 & 2 Seriously, as long as there is more than one type equipment there will be the types of discussions that you bemoan. It is what it is. As to why these discussions take place I'll offer this- since I am not a machine rest or a very sturdy tripod I need all the help I can get when hand holding the camera to take pics. Higher ISO/faster shutter speed, shake reduction, faster/sharper glass… whatever is available at hand I'll gladly use. Others may have differing reasons, but that's mine.

11-24-2010, 08:28 PM	#4
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	A gear oriented forum may not be the best place for you. Some sort of photo sharing forum might work better for you. The Pentax Discuss Mail List is very good, not so heavy on gear talk, but a lot of images get shown and talked about.

11-24-2010, 08:55 PM	#5
rhodopsin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Deep Forest Posts: 643	Originally posted by CWyatt ... I have taken better photos with the kit lens than I have with my nice sharp primes, and vice versa. ... Eh? I don't understand! (or maybe I do understand ) Love the Dorothea Lange quote; very true in my experience!

11-24-2010, 11:10 PM	#6
Elva Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Grahamstown in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa Photos: Gallery Posts: 125	Photography is 80% eye, 15% luck, 5% equipment. Do this exercise, get a point and shoot 4 or 4 MP digital camera, and a few photographers together, 5 subjects to photograph, one shot for each subject by each photographer. Then review the results, no photo shop allowed, all photos are revied stright from the camera, fixed lens 4 MP compact digital camera to be used and the sme camer used by everyone. This will show what I said by the first line. Have fun if you do this.

11-24-2010, 11:56 PM	#7
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452	Originally posted by Elva Photography is 80% eye, 15% luck, 5% equipment. Unless you don't have your gear, then it's 100% the gear's fault!!

11-25-2010, 12:04 AM	#8
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	Originally posted by CWyatt .Use what you need to and be done with it! Thoughts? Discussed to death. Some people list gear so others can (hopefully not) ask about it, or at least offer some evidence of knowing something about that which they speak. Neither always works.

11-25-2010, 01:14 AM	#9
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	PETA called and left a message. Something about abusing a dead horse.

11-25-2010, 06:27 AM	#10
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Wheatfield A gear oriented forum may not be the best place for you. +1 Regarding your question: There is no question that the most important factor in getting a great image sits behind the viewfinder. However, there is also no denying that the potential output is limited by the tools. Sure, a good photographer can get good images with the limitations of mediocre gear or even use the limitations to their benefit. But the degrees of freedom will be limited nevertheless. Isn't it true that the greats all had their gear preferences (i.e., they didn't take a "don't care" approach) and achieved mastery regarding the technical foundation of their craft? Once someone has found the gear that suits their needs, they can leave a gearist forum. If their one goal is good photography that is. Another valid goal could be to keep talking about gear. I wouldn't judge the merit of these differing goals. They are just different.

11-25-2010, 07:43 AM	#11
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I have a couple of observations here, but I agree with most of the pther posts too - this has been beaten to death already - yes, the biggest thing impeeding great photos is the person directly behind the viewfinder, - a technically oriented forum may not be the best enfironment for someone who does not care for gear discussions BUT one thing I do see a lot of here, is when people try to impose their gear on others. I am probably just as guilty as the next person in this respect, because, we all have our biases. But I do try to explain not a spefic lens or set of lenses for exaample, but to explain the thought process people need to go through in designing a kit. Same with cameras, there are still lots of great shots taken with first generation 6MP bodies. After all, as I sit here with my 22 inch 1680 x 1050 pixel monitor, and realize it can only display 1/4 of the frame from my istD at 100% resolution, just how much resolution do you really need? But sometimes gear has an advantage, and that advantage is important. Just go oout to shoot something with a K or M42 lens, and a flash, and you will realize just how important having an istD is over a K10 or K7. TTL flash beats the hell out of manual or Auto flash.

11-25-2010, 10:43 AM	#12
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by CWyatt "What use is having a great depth of field if there is not an adequate depth of feeling?" - W. Eugene Smith That is a fantastic quote! There's so much technically good but emotionally empty stuff out there. It's like plastic surgery - all surface and no depth.

11-26-2010, 09:28 AM - 1 Like	#13
Coeurdechene Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: madrid Photos: Albums Posts: 833	This is the third post i've read that has been labeled like abused topic, repost, etc..and i'm quite happy this does happen because if not people new, that are just browsing ramdomly in their spare time might not read or participate in this topics..i wasn't looking for it just stumbled across this topic.. Then gear discussion..i like to discuss my gear and find the tons of feedback of lenses i'm considering to buy, it's fun and usefull..maybe its some kind of onanism where we get pleasure from something that doesnt have to be trascendental, maybe we discuss so much our gear as a way of enjoiying it (not only using it has to be a source of pleasure..) and that doesn't mean that other aspects of fotography aren't discussed..You can always go and post your fotos and ask for critique or advice, or you can view other people's fotos (there is a section of the forum where people do that:P).. And to finish this post reminded me of this guy, he was a hobo who roamed the streets with his toilet paper cardboard, box and tape camera and made some beautifull photos...captured great moments with that 3 cent camera...he died not long ago..i wish i could remember his name.. if someones knows him please remind me his name

11-29-2010, 06:21 AM	#14
r0ckstarr Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,507	I care.

11-29-2010, 07:16 AM	#15
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	It is MUCH easier to talk about things with quantitative measures (focal length, magnification, sharpness,etc) than things with qualitative measures (beauty, balance, emotional association, etc..) I believe it is possible to quantify some of the more qualitative aspects of photography, but suggesting such usually results in a flood of objection. The alternative is to whine about too much technical talk while making no attempt to contribute to critical discussion about qualitative aspects. Meanwhile I have no doubt that many artists have well developed internalized quantitative rules of how to assemble a qualitatively pleasing work - their difficulty in articulating those rules does not deny their existence....but boy do they hit the roof when I suggest sharing the rules by which they develop artistic works! Perhaps as quantitative measures of image quality are publicly identified they will no longer be thought of as mysterious and therefore be removed from the emotionalist's hidden technological repertoire? Dave PS using a longer than normal lens for flattering portrait work is a good example of a technical technique based on/ influencing qualitative results; what's wrong with discussing this trick openly?