Contituation of the Versatility thread

Started Apr 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
danijel973
Contributing MemberPosts: 630Gear list
Like?
Re: Advice for the thread starter
In reply to Richard, Apr 6, 2013

Richard wrote:

Half of which were made with a entry-level m43 camera and a Minolta lens from the '80s, and which the OP could've made easily with his Nikon, as far as hardware is concerned.

No, you must admit, he needed fast glass to do what you are doing.

Of course I do, but foremost he needs to know what he's doing, and he doesn't. He's just juggling with a few poorly digested concepts he's picked up on the Net and is, for all intents and purposes, a troll.

As an addition to the kit lens he could buy a set of Kenko macro extenders and a 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor for a very modest amount of money and create DoF thin enough to make his eyeballs bleed.

Still not versatile which is the topic of the post. You are limited by distance to subject AF and other things. I agree that you can be created and do a lot of things but that is not the point of the post, it is versatility. The FF systems from Nikon and Canon are unsurpassed in this regard

No, they are not. In fact, this versatility illusion is something that prevents some people from ever learning anything, since they constantly attempt to have a "versatile" system, that could "shoot anything". When I see a person talking about versatility it usually means he's clueless. Skilled photographers simply match specific equipment to specific needs, unlike completely unskilled people who buy a 1Ds body and several f/2.8 zooms and take that stuff to a vacation where they think they "have all the focal lengths covered at f/2.8".

Have in mind that the 50mm f/1.7 is mounted on E-PL1, with m43 sensor, and cost me around $30.

If you would explain this to him perhaps you could convince him an E PL1 and a 50 1.7 is enough even though that is not what the topic it about. Most pros do not buy mirrorless because they need the most versatile and the best tool.

Pros do not buy versatile tools. Amateurs do. A pro would buy a camera/lens combination specifically designed for head&shoulders portraits, or for weddings, or for shooting sports. This will often mean having a Hasselblad for studio, a Canon body with a 500mm f/4 for sports and OM-D for street photography. A pro will not care about the fact that his Hasselblad doesn't do sports. A pro will not care that his field camera doesn't have autofocus. A pro will not care that his studio portrait lens isn't a zoom. He will know exactly what he needs for that one single purpose and will buy equipment from this knowledge. A professional would know that shooting sports requires one of those white lenses that cost $5000, and if he really needed such a lens, he would just buy a camera body that goes with it, instead of trying to make one system he could use for both candid street shots and for that white lens. This is one important thing to consider.

The other thing to consider is that versatility is expensive. Trying to do everything with a single instrument will usually be the most expensive way to approach things, and furthermore, it will have no real benefits. It's like trying to have a car that is both an SUV and a sports car. Eventually it becomes both super-expensive and super-useless, like trying to use a Hasselblad with a huge telephoto lens. That's why pros don't do it. They usually tailor equipment to fit very specific needs.

I had my awakening regarding all this years ago, when I saw some real pro photographers at work. They are totally purpose-focused, to an incredible degree. They know exactly what they want to do and they fit equipment into their needs, and the ways in which they approach this are usually completely beyond what an amateur would think of. For instance, I've seen one pro negotiate a public demo of a compact camera which he surrounded by a studio, Bowens lights, cables to power the lights, a tripod to operate the camera from, and a large format inkjet printer to print out the portraits he made of volunteers on a public fair, and he made this into a marketing campaign for the camera manufacturer who paid very good money for it all, and the camera itself was a small-sensor compact that was barely fit for purpose. The other pro that I know bought a Canon body to fit on his Nikon lenses, because it somehow fit his needs and he didn't really need autofocus. They don't even seem to register the stuff amateurs fuss over.

So if he knew what to buy and what to do with it he could easily do something similar, but he'd have to read those books, because there's some basic theory behind all that. He seems to think that for versatility he needs a 35mm camera, and the fact is, he needs knowledge on how to adapt and use his current camera to obtain certain results.

I agree with you, that he may be ignorant to the options, and you should explain that but that is not what the topic was about and you demeaned him instead.

He is ignorant and I told him to read books and learn instead of having baseless opinions. That is my honest response to his opinions and he can either take it or leave it. You can call it demeaning, but ignorance itself is demeaning, so me pointing it out is the least of his problems. His main problem is that he doesn't have any experience with actual photography.

No you would rather demean him and his images and tell him to go read books.

That *is* the solution to his problem, yes.

I said if I gave him your systems whatever they may be and the 1.7 or 1.4 lenses, he would be able to get the narrow dof just like your images without having to buy extension tubes.

Yeah, and if a pine were an elm it wouldn't have needles.

If he actually had any experience with real cameras, real lenses and real photography, I wouldn't be sending him to read books and learn.

But since you are proclaiming to be the expert on these things and why we don't need FF, perhaps you can help me.

This is the point where I stopped paying attention.

 danijel973's gear list:danijel973's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus PEN E-PL1 Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow