[Dario79]

No One is Making a Bad Camera, You're Just a Bad Photographer

[jatrax]

Lot of truth there. But I don't get the dig on Pentax fans. I thought all Pentax fans did was gripe about how bad Pentax was. Must have been referring to some other Pentax fans I guess.

[panoguy]

I love it! Yet another op-ed that basically says "gear doesn't matter, but we're a gear review site so keep clicking!"

I mean, isn't Phoblo basically known as a 2nd tier gearhead site?
(Well, aside from being a cautionary tale of badly crushing highlights in post...)

[VisualDarkness]

You need the latest and most expensive equipment or else you're not a photographer. We just keep quiet that many of the worlds best photos, that many hope to achieve the same success as, are taken with cameras and lenses that can be found dirt cheap on garage sales.

[delegopa]

Skills definitely matter more than gear. Especially in the digital age where you will see everything in web sizes. Gear can get important however if you want to print/display large AND expect viewers to take a closer look. Still you can workaround this by stichtching for example. Creativity is the key

On the noise part in the article: When shooting digital the grain is not evenly distributed like on film. Usually a well lit subject has no visible grain while dark elements can get noticeable grain. (Imagine Night time settings)
Therefore I dont like the uneven noise in digital shots that much...

And brands exist so you can get a distinctive label to show you have the better black brick

[Dario79]

I'm not gonna judge their intentions but I'm huge supportive of skill over gear.
Once I was so frustrated over some forum discusion (not on PF) that I went to 500px and searched "worst" camera bodys and lenses.
I found incredible amount of great images. So it really is 80% skill and 20% gear...

[Rondec]

They are mostly right. You can get great shots with any camera out there. However, some cameras will be more conducive to you taking them with you and enjoying the experience of shooting more. That's a pretty personal thing, but I do think people need to pay attention to what they enjoy using.

[Miguel]

Way too many words, cheesy ones included, to say "all cameras are good."

M

[Imageman]

Excellent words excellently expressed.


Good photographers know this already.


One caveat. When trying to improve we get mind numbing crap advice about thirds and other composition "Laws".


Learn the rules then don't slavishly follow them. Break the damned rules.

[stevebrot]

I love the title and like the article! Almost all of today's digital cameras (and phones) are capable of very, very nice images. As for Pentax fans behaving badly...apparently he reads these forums!


Steve

[MadMathMind]

Skills definitely matter more than gear.

They are mostly right. You can get great shots with any camera out there. However, some cameras will be more conducive to you taking them with you and enjoying the experience of shooting more. That's a pretty personal thing, but I do think people need to pay attention to what they enjoy using.

The issue I encounter most is that as a normal tourist or average Joe, your shooting conditions are often far from optimal.

Example: Pentaxians love their prime lenses over zoom lenses. They're great, no doubt. But the issue that plagues them is that they only work when you can move around freely to get the shot you want. If the lens is too short, then you can crop in post, but there is no such fix for too long. You either need to get lucky with the focal length or be able to back up a lot. The latter is sometimes not feasible. Try taking a few steps back in a crowded place: if you take 3 steps back, 3 people will jam into that space, so you can't take the shot. (This was exactly my experience in China. Was very thankful for the new Sigma 18-35.)

That's an example of where gear isn't technically necessary but practically speaking, it is. If you had a press pass and had the place to yourself, then no problem.

Same thing goes for fast lenses and high ISO. If you can use a tripod, then there's no worries. But very rarely can you, either due to the "people crowd" issue or venue rules. End result: an average Joe cares a lot about high ISO noise because the option to shoot at low ISO with a tripod is just not there most of the time.

Then, of course, for most of us, we have to take the pictures when we visit, even if the light is poor or suboptimal. Some can be fixed in post but it's not always fun to spend hours and hours editing photos. If gear can fix some of the problems beforehand, then it's worth it. Were we pros who visit a site for 3 days and take pictures at all hours of the day just so the light is right, then so much stuff wouldn't be necessary.

[Rondec]

The issue I encounter most is that as a normal tourist or average Joe, your shooting conditions are often far from optimal.

Example: Pentaxians love their prime lenses over zoom lenses. They're great, no doubt. But the issue that plagues them is that they only work when you can move around freely to get the shot you want. If the lens is too short, then you can crop in post, but there is no such fix for too long. You either need to get lucky with the focal length or be able to back up a lot. The latter is sometimes not feasible. Try taking a few steps back in a crowded place: if you take 3 steps back, 3 people will jam into that space, so you can't take the shot. (This was exactly my experience in China. Was very thankful for the new Sigma 18-35.)

That's an example of where gear isn't technically necessary but practically speaking, it is. If you had a press pass and had the place to yourself, then no problem.

Same thing goes for fast lenses and high ISO. If you can use a tripod, then there's no worries. But very rarely can you, either due to the "people crowd" issue or venue rules. End result: an average Joe cares a lot about high ISO noise because the option to shoot at low ISO with a tripod is just not there most of the time.

Then, of course, for most of us, we have to take the pictures when we visit, even if the light is poor or suboptimal. Some can be fixed in post but it's not always fun to spend hours and hours editing photos. If gear can fix some of the problems beforehand, then it's worth it. Were we pros who visit a site for 3 days and take pictures at all hours of the day just so the light is right, then so much stuff wouldn't be necessary.

Every camera and lens is by definition a compromise of size, ergonomics, speed of use, and cost. If, you move up sensor size, you will have better high iso -- in particular, if you are using relatively faster lenses. I do think you over estimate the time needed to post process in a program like Lightroom. Creating a preset and then applying it to your high iso images takes about a minute. Obviously there are more in depth programs like Noise Ninja, etc that take more time to learn and to use, but I just don't find they are terribly necessary, unless, as you say, you are a professional.

[normhead]

Excellent words excellently expressed.


Good photographers know this already.


One caveat. When trying to improve we get mind numbing crap advice about thirds and other composition "Laws".


Learn the rules then don't slavishly follow them. Break the damned rules.

And read this article...



Article is posted below.

http://imageshack.us/a/img191/3669/popularphotography1l.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img829/4141/popularphotography2l.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img687/4360/popularphotography3l.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img404/136/popularphotography4l.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img201/726/popularphotography5l.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img827/595/popularphotography61l.jpg

Ah ha, Images shack it is.

[Steve.Ledger]

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/167-peg-judges/218978-those-who-havent-st...#ixzz39vvAJr1y

Private forum

[stevebrot]

And read this article...

Private forum

Norm...perhaps you could get the mods to move your post to a different location?


Steve