Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-11-2017, 02:53 PM - 1 Like   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,901
Pro Photographers with Amateur Gear vs. an Amateur with Pro Gear

Please check the link.

I think this should be a sticky somewhere


Pro Photographers with Amateur Gear vs. an Amateur with Pro Gear

06-11-2017, 02:58 PM - 1 Like   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,901
Original Poster
06-11-2017, 03:38 PM - 1 Like   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Buffy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Greater Boston area, Massachusetts
Posts: 363
Re: Pro Photographers with Amateur Gear vs. an Amateur with Pro Gear

Some years ago I came across a web site that had a featured B&W photos of the Oregon coast taken with a Holga. Beautiful, haunting images, all of them, and I refer to it anytime someone asks me about gear. There is no "best" anything, there is simply the right equipment for the images you want to make.
06-11-2017, 04:45 PM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,632
I'm afraid you're very much mistaken, Alamo. If this Nikon camera gives me blurry photos, I'm buying a Canon! Or vica versa. ;P

06-11-2017, 05:44 PM   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,027
Interesting talk, thank you for sharing.
I am an Amateur and still, quite often get questions from people asking what camera I am using for photos on Instagram.
My answer has always been a Camera's brand doesn't matter. Use whatever body you have but technique uses, location scout and invest in a good lens can help at less according to what I am doing, I guess, it is somewhat inline with the points made in the video.
I have never point people to a particular brand including Pentax unless the person already have or interesting in Pentax.

Last edited by pakinjapan; 06-11-2017 at 05:51 PM.
06-11-2017, 05:48 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,090
Sigourney WeaverPro with pro gear?
06-11-2017, 09:04 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,018
QuoteOriginally posted by alamo5000 Quote
Pro Photographers with Amateur Gear vs. an Amateur with Pro Gear
I would say, yeah, that's not a surprise, pro gear does not make photog.
However, there is something different: Pentax K1.
06-11-2017, 09:30 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
IgorZ's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,667
I still want a 31 limited... But at least now I can argue I shouldn't want it...

06-15-2017, 08:19 AM - 2 Likes   #9
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,303
Lame test, IMHO. The setting was determined by the folks trying to prove their point. I think it needed something less controlled to determine "eye vs gear".
06-15-2017, 08:29 AM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,163
What is "Professional" gear? What is "Amateur" gear? Is "Amateur" gear somehow set up to stop functioning if you sell enough photos to make a living? Is "Professional" gear set up to not function if you don't sell photos?
06-15-2017, 08:33 AM - 1 Like   #11
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,244
Ha, ha, what I've always said. That always get's ignored, or in the case of the above, ridiculed or dismissed.
It's not the camera that makes a pro, it's the creativity with the camera he has.
What determines that to some degree is learning how to use the camera he/she has selected, well enough, that whatever limitations it may have don't get in the way of creativity.

This test displays what a lot of folks here are avoiding like the plague. Good photographers can take compelling images with the gear you own. Buying the gear they own won't help you.

And the main feature there is, he/she knows the camera well enough that whatever it's limitations, they don't get in his/her way.That's not about buying this lens or that lens, or this or that body. That's about learning to be creative with what you have.

It's not at all surprising that we already have folks attacking the way the evidence was complied. When the results don't fit your belief system, attack the way the test was done. It's a strategy used by folks who have nothing except that what they believe says the evidence can't be right. Unfortunately in the greater world, your beliefs affect only you. They are pretty much irrelevant to anyone outside your skin. Where as evidence can be appreciated by anyone. I hate seeing folks crippled by their own belief systems, but what are you going to do?

When they see a great picture, it would seem many want to know about the gear. I always want to know about the photographer. Images that rely on the technical, rather than creative shooting are almost always at best interesting but faddy, at worst, just un-interesting and boring.

Last edited by normhead; 07-08-2017 at 07:52 AM.
06-15-2017, 08:51 AM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,901
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Ha, ha, what I've always said. That always get's ignored, or in the case of the above, ridiculed or dismissed.
It's not the camera that makes a pro, it's the creativity with the camera he has.
What determines that to some degree is learning how to use the camera he/she has selected, well enough, that whatever limitations it may have don't get in the way of creativity.

This test displays what a lot of folks here are avoiding like the plague. Good photographers can take compelling images with the gear you own. Buying the gear they own won't help you.

And the main feature there is, he/she knows the camera well enough that whatever it's limitations, they don't get in his/her way.That's not about buying this lens or that lens, or this or that body. That's about learning to be creative with what you have.
Just think. Back in the olden days people used to have to use this stuff called 'film' and it was totally manual. Their cameras didn't have any kind of auto focus mechanisms either.

If I've said it once I've said it a million times, a lot of the time people talk about photography as though they are a commissioned salesman in an electronics shop. Don't get me wrong that stuff is good to know and in some cases very good to know but a lot of people forget things like 'light', 'composition', 'subject matter', 'framing' or 10,000 other things that actually do make up good shots.

Heck, even if you throw out the totally manual film days and compare current DSLRs to those from 15 years ago there is no comparison technically speaking...but back then people still managed to take really awesome shots.
06-16-2017, 04:33 AM   #13
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It's not at all surprising that we already have folks attacking the way the evidence was complied. When the results don't fit your belief system, attack the way the test was done. It's a strategy used by folks who have nothing except that what they believe says the evidence can't be right.

Geez, Norm...stereotype folks much? LOL My complaint was that the test was done with portraiture, which is a pretty specific form of photography and one which takes years to learn to do well. So naturally the people setting up the test would have a built-in advantage regardless of what kind of gear they used. If it truly is the photographer and not the gear, there was no need to put their thumb on the scale like that. And as for what some of us who didn't like the test conditions believe...I believe that most of the photographs I sold over the years were taken with a K2 film camera that I paid $20 for because the ASA dial was stuck at 200. I bought it, took it home, and worked with it until I got it down to ASA 50, then used it to shoot Velvia for the next 20 years or so, selling enough pics in the process to pay for all my still and video cameras. So no, I don't believe it's the gear that makes the difference. Heck, if we're going to be honest, you spend far, far more on gear than I ever dream of. Why do you do waste the money if you don't have to?
06-16-2017, 05:43 AM   #14
Seeker of Knowledge
Loyal Site Supporter
aslyfox's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,149
I prove it every day

it isn't the equipment, it is the operator

give me the best of everything, if I screw up it doesn't matter how good it is

the local brick and mortar photography store has classes. At the start of each class, the "students" are shown a fantastic large photo of a lizard and asked to guess about the equipment and the quality of the equipment

they are always wrong

it was photographed years ago by one of the owners of the store using one of the first digital cameras but he knew what he was doing

imho, ymmv
06-16-2017, 05:46 AM   #15
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,244
QuoteQuote:
My complaint was that the test was done with portraiture, which is a pretty specific form of photography and one which takes years to learn to do well. So naturally the people setting up the test would have a built-in advantage regardless of what kind of gear they used.
As opposed to us landscape/wildlife guys who can just walk out the door and produce great images right out of the cradle?

Needless to say, I still don't understand your point.

Having trained in portraiture, and commercial, I will agree, the ability to be a portrait artist is as much a matter of personal traits, the ability to recognize body positions that will be unphotogenic, most important in my view, the ability to put your subjects at ease. It is a specific skill set. But, that being said, it's no more demanding than anything but snapshot photography.

The point of the video is that if you want to learn photography, learn a photographic skill, like portraiture. Buying gear should be the last thing you think about. Your last post re-inforces that point.

Last edited by normhead; 06-16-2017 at 06:15 AM.
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!
amateur, amateur gear, camera, gear, photographers, photography, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Enthusiast vs Prosumer vs Semi Pro vs Pro vs APSC vs Full Frame mickyd Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 11-12-2013 07:14 PM
Pentax announces k-5 digital slr for advanced amateur photographers Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 3 09-20-2010 05:55 PM
pro vs. amateur mattdm Photographic Technique 85 06-17-2009 05:59 AM
Client Etiquette, Question for the semi-Pro/Pro Photographers metalfab Photographic Technique 29 07-06-2008 07:04 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:00 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