iae aa eia: what is a professional? a professional photographer is a person who makes all his profits from photography. if the profits are not all from photography, then he is a semiprofessional. this is the true definition, and it has nothing to do with skills (though professionals are expected to show them).
what about equipment? well, when we say professional camera, we actually mean "professional targeted camera", because only the ones who earns all their money from photography can eventually, and eventually needs to, buy a better (more enduring, faster,...) camera.
That's absurd. You guys are killing me with this pro stuff. So what you're telling me is that if you make most of your living via photography this year, then you're a pro. But if you work the same hours in the studio as a photographer and make the exact amount of money as you did the previous year (or more), but an ebook that you wrote made $1 more than your photography, then all the sudden you're a "semi-pro" for that year?
That's just nuts, just like any insurance company knows. Try to tell an insurance company that you made $60,000 with your photography, but only $40,000 at your day job, so you want to get the non-professional rate to insure all your equipment and the insurance company will laugh in your face... justly so, because that definition is utter nonsense.
Your definition is not the definition of a "professional"; which, in fact, has absolutely nothing to do with how much you make. The number of skilled *professional* photographers having part-time jobs is common.
OldArrow: No such thing like Pro cameras, there's only Pro photographers. And what makes them Pro (besides being obvious where their bread comes from) is sometimes the fact that they can do good photos with any camera. Otherwise, mercantilistic lore or not, there are only expensive, less expensive, not expensive, and cheap cameras. Technically, these will do what their specs say, if you either need or can afford to use them. But in the end, it will always be 10% equipment and 90% author - at any price level.
Saying there's no such thing as a "pro" camera body, "pro" lighting, etc.., is like saying there's no such thing as a "pro" drill, "pro" sewing machines, or "pro" scanners.
Most reasonable people know exactly what is meant between "pro" gear and the rest of the stuff.
There's a reason why a pro sewing machine costs much more than what you find sold in most stores. There's a reason why a "pro" drill costs a lot more than your $19.95 Black & Decker drill. There's a reason why an Alien Bee ring light costs $400 dollars and the Broncolor ring light $3,500... one *is* "pro" gear, the other isn't but pros use it.
Who uses the gear has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the gear is designed with the "pro" in mind. The difference in speed, build quality, quick buttons, etc., between a pro Nikon/Canon body and a 5D series is obvious; doesn't mean every pro *needs* or even *wants* that capability, but some do have the need/want.
Knowing the difference is elementary.
That's absolutely ridiculous. Insurance companies know it's ridiculous too. Tell your insurer that you make $87,000 per annum shooting aerial photography, but you make $112,000 per annum flying people back and forth to oil rigs and doing remote soil surveys as a pilot & soil/water engineer. They'll charge you a pro rate in a heartbeat because you *are* a pro making money with your photography.
You're not a "semi-pro" just because you didn't make more with your camera than you do on the day job.
What if Bill Gates loved to shoot and sell large format prints of movie stars in his home and made $400,000 per annum doing so... even though his financial holding yield more per annum?Semi pro still eh? ... but if he gave all his holdings away then he magically at that instant becomes a "pro"? That's just silly :)
vFunct: Far too many moronic non-professional photographers that think they are in the same league as professional photographers.
No, you're not as good as a professional photographer because you are using a consumer dSLR. Any editor can tell who is using high-end equipment and who isn't, in addition to be being able to spot artistic talent suitable for their media brand.
The editor defines who is pro. Not you.
The "editors" and "directors" aren't on the radar of most professional photographers. It is so common place for professional photographers to bend over backwards and take it up the rear for some "editor" or "director" and receiving crummy pay in return, that I think most of the young folks today looking to make it big in photography aren't even interested in breaking their backs dealing with publications when they can make more than that on their own.
I remember when everyone wanted to shoot for National Geo, Vogue, Playboy- now scores of photographers wanting to get paid don't even THINK of even considering busting their hump for those types of jobs.
Today many photographers are courting corporate accounts and Industrial shoots because they often (usually?) entail less work, less fuss, and better overall financial satisfaction for mid-level (most pros) photographers. It's all about who pays well, and generally speaking, it isn't work that has to do with some art director/editor.
Maxfield_photo: I own the Sekonic 758DR and the color checker passport, and they are both worth their weight in gold. I got to play with the 478 at a camera show, and it seems pretty cool, but I'm not used to touch screens, sort of a doubly steep learning curve for me. Gotta say though it would be really nice to have the manual light controls remotely right there in the meter.
If you find yourself wondering, "Do I really need a light meter?", well honestly, no, unless you work in a high volume production studio and need to meter ratios quickly and precisely 'need' is too strong a word. Will a light meter and a color checker improve your photography? Yes, immensely.
There are FAR more people who can get practical use from a light meter than just "high volume production studio" folks.
How does one use the in-camera meter to figure out the % of flash to ambient light and to keep such constant throughout a shoot when shooting family portraits, glamour or early morning nudes? ... especially when the sunlight is rapidly changing in the morning and evening?
I also use the 758DR (wonderful meter isn't it?) + colour card and being able to quickly dial in a camera setting that gives me, say, 30% flash to 70% ambient is one of my most liked features.
Shooting on location rapidly moving from place to place toting strobes and packs- it's VERY valuable to be able to instantly get an incident reading by having the client hold the meter, trigger the flash & you're done! No client wants to wait for a photographer to fiddle with lighting %ages.
Dedicated meters are useful across the photographic spectrum Pro or novice; they can make a huge difference! :)
Joe Ogiba: Michelle Obama's New Official Portrait taken with 5D MKIII w/EF24-70mm f/2.8L II USM at 63mm ,F4, 50iso, 1/80th sec :http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8532/8491445521_3fd1722dd7_o.jpg
I don't think most Americans give a care about something as nit pik as the size of Mrs. Obama's eyes. Most reasonable people aren't so tunnel visioned.
That's one problem with professional photography today- gotten so nit-pik that people can't see the big picture any longer... akin to an English teacher hell bent on her students being able to diagram a sentence correctly when most inhabitants of the planet engaged in business (to include professional publishing) couldn't care less about such.
Her eyes aren't perfect? As if most people give a hoot. Meanwhile that photographer (and many more like him generating non-perfect eyes in their portraits) are getting paid, and I gather the bulk of those who are super critical would starve if they had to survive on their own photography. ;)
Marek07: From a professional working environment, I have had this lens for over 5 months now, and is in constant use, I shoot Fashion and Portraiture and have to say it has become the workhorse in my kit even leaving my 50mm 1.2 to gather dust it's that good, of course there is always going to be distortion and vignetting with any zoom but the new 24-70 is the sharpest, fastest zoom I have used and has great bokeh.
I use it with the new 5d mk3 which now has lens correction, and shoot studio, location, front lit, backlit...
Initially I went into a camera store with a few flash cards and tried a variety of 24-70 lenses including the nikon d800e with it's 24-70 and the new canon easily came top.
As most professionals shooting to pay their mortgage already know, for most fashion, glamour, and portrait work, whether you shooting with a prime or premium zoom hardly matters.
While there are distinct advantages to both (Zooms come into their own during action portraiture when zooming with your sneakers isn't practical & primes come into their own WHEN that extra stop of light, light-for-focusing, or shutter speed makes a big difference which isn't often shooting general fashion, etc.)
It's only the bottom line that counts, and the bottom line is that most clients and professional photographers can't tell what you shot with after post processing is all said and done.
Many zooms best primes back in the mid 2000s, today in 2013 the prime vs. zoom fodder is just infantile. Generally, the days of there being a glaring difference to the point of a zoom being a detriment are long gone.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: An MF system or a brand new yacht: you choose.
An 80mp Phase with a bevy of lenses and premium bron color strobes doesn't equate to the cost of a cheap Cessna 162 (about $160k)... let alone a little e'lcheapo yacht starting around $400k. ;)
rrccad: odd .. i thought nikon claimed that flourite had no advantages .. and was inferior ..
"Nikon developed ED (Extra-low Dispersion) glass to enable the production of lenses that offer superior sharpness and color correction by minimizing chromatic aberration.Put simply, chromatic aberration is a type of image and color dispersion that occurs when light rays of varying wavelengths pass through optical glass. In the past, correcting this problem for telephoto lenses required special optical elements that offer anomalous dispersion characteristics - specifically calcium fluoride crystals. However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index."
I hope they fixed that little problem they were having with flourite before putting it into a 18K supertelephoto :)
Writers aren't usually scientists, and quite often have no working knowledge about the subject they're writing about. Even today, you'll read and hear the media talk about how many "fighter jets" were deployed to an area, when "jets" don't fight at all. They merely propel an aircraft. They should use the term "fighter aircraft".
Sometimes they do say "jet fighters"... but who in their right mind thinks that a developed nation is deploying manned propeller aircraft to attack ground or air targets on the modern battle field?
"Flourite glass"... it won't be the last time you hear that. ;)
cgarrard: Hmm the new 800mm or a new car? One thing is for certain, the lens is not likely to depreciate in value like a new car will :).
... new or used, they are about as easy to get as a Honda.
fad: The problem with the "Download Original" button is that it makes it look as if the viewer is being granted permission to download someone else's work, when that usually is not the photographer's intention.
Good work guys. As suggested, I think "view original" would be optimum over "download original".
I clicked on this photograph because I found the thumbnail compelling and interesting. After opening the photograph full size and reading the caption, I feel a bit less analytical and more human.
Not only does the photograph speak, but the model is beautiful.
brianj: Its almost as ridiculous as the size of the DSLR just for taking a child's photo!
How "ridiculous" is it?
I wouldn't want to shoot child shots with a 1.6x crop as I find it too restrictive (I did it for years at 1.5x with pro Nikon bodies); so that rules out everything beside the 5D3 and 1Dx for many photographers, and more will settle for the 5D3 + grip for action portraits due to cost.
I'd much rather shoot a fast raw shooter an 8-10 fps burst can be the difference between "awww I LOVE this photo!" and selling $675 worth of work from a session, or wasting your time.
Indoors or out, there are few lenses that can match the *results* and latitude offered by the large primes (85, 200 f/2; 300 f/2.8, etc..) when shooting children in their play environments. People usually settle for less only because of cost.
So, realistically speaking it isn't "ridiculous" at all for a working photographer to shoot children with a large camera and a large lens when there aren't smaller FF options that offer the same capability. ;)
Erik van den Elsen: I find this an awkward new Canon lens; I own the 24-105 F/4 L lens myself and find it very good, at least I have a very sharp copy. The current price of this 24-105 is now around 900 Euro.
So, why spend 600 euro more on a lens that has a much shorter range (24-70) but the same speed? Just because it has a Macro feature that you use every now and then? If you're really into macro, you will buy a dedicated Macro lens.
This lens sounds superfluous to me already from the beginning seen the rest of the Canon lens line-up and the range it offers... And this price is really rediculous! Much too expensive just like all other Canon lenses.
"much shorter range"? See how many simple steps you have to take to make up a measly 35mm. Seriously, the difference between 70mm and 105mm in most circumstances isn't enough to even quibble over. :)
smileblog: >The buffer capacity:>RAW: 8 (which was 16 at D5100)>RAW+JPEG: 6 (which was 10)
Can't shoot even "less than 2 sec" continuously at 5fps!!!
Nothing is wrong, because if you need a larger buffer capacity when shooting raw (something I too fancy) or you shoot a lot of raw+jpeg and want the camera to shoot, save, and buffer those files rapidly... then Nikon already has a camera in its lineup that will easily cater to your need ;)
parallaxproblem: Simply awful: hundreds of dollars for something that becomes landfill as soon as the battery is expired. Shall we also start scrapping cars when the tyres wear or brake pads need replacing?
Apple was the company that started this wasteful trend and I will never buy one of their products for exactly this reason
yet you think nothing of buying a potato chip bag only half filled with actual product. Do you take your own canvas bags to the store or use (then throw away) paper or plastic bags given to you at the store? Do you bike or carpool to work? Apple didn't start the trash-trend, and there are far more landfill-filling problem products than Apple gear. Bottom line is that your personal waste (not your bio waste) is likely more of a concern to the earth than Apple stuff being thrown away. ;)
Robert Soderlund: For me, "bokeh" usually translates into "censored, i want you to see this only". This is only my opinion since i do not want to spoon feed people subjects and mostly i tend to follow realism over expression, i want people to see and choose the appropriate subject in a photo. There are of course situations where the picture would get too cluttered without a certain spot focused in on. I find this f/4 a welcome addition over the gap that exists currently (2.8-5.6), enough lux power without going heavily into fast sport territory while keeping the size/weight down a bit.
How it actually performs is another story, looks damn good on paper!
When I look at a small bird photograph taken by a 300 f/4 vs. a 300 f/2.8 lens wide open, or when I look at the difference in the texture of the bushes behind a subject, the lens zoomed to 35mm or so, when using a 24-105 lens at f4 vs. 24-70 lens at 2.8... I ask that you *please* "spoon feed" me the better (smoother) looking/textured background regardless of how isolated the subject looks.
I also like how a lens focuses better under many conditions and the increased brightness of the viewfinder with the gaping 2.8 (or faster) apertures.
I think it's about time Nikon got on the ball and brought forth an f4 version of this lens.
Excellent! I praise all the hard work that has gone into such a great site. Good work guys/gals.
I hope they will start deleting "opinions" from the user review section. When I click on a camera to see what actual owners have to say, I don't want to hear opinions from people who've never laid eyes (let alone hands) on the camera.
InTheMist: Now it's getting interesting!
I take it as Hasselblad finally raising the white flag... for a 2nd time? Their innovation and practical progression in the market seems stagnant to me. I wonder why they didn't upgrade the 500w series camera as it hadn't been updated since the 90's. A slight re-design focused on a highly precise and dampened mirror action, focus confirmation light (for us old folks) and a 40mp back at an eye-popping price; a high quality adapter allowing the user to use the latest lenses and a few leaf shutter lenses that offer 1/6000 (or higher) sync (adapter that enables the user to use Mamiya's (LF) lenses).
Offer that body, 40mp back + 80mm leaf shutter lens for $12,000 (several years ago) and non price gauging prices on 45 and 90 degree viewers, etc., and I think that they'd had a product that would be considered by a lot of professional photographer even sans autofocus.
Now it seems too late unless they just all the sudden smell the coffee that been brewing.
Tim in upstate NY: Hasselblad is trying to survive the impending demise of MF. Can't blame them for trying.
You mean in the "near" future? I like MF best out of all the formats, but the writing has long been on the wall probably starting with the 1dsIII, and now as many real-world reviews have shown, the D800e is firmly in MF territory in terms of overall performance.
There are still some glaring advantages to using the larger format such as 1/600th syc speed using leaf shutter lenses, etc., but for most photography using 16-40mp MF, the D800e is just another nail in the coffin as far as many MF renters are concerned as each iteration of pro dslr bodies make even renting MF less practical.
I would not invest in a Hassy system today, especially since Mamiya gives much more for the money and seems to offer a better body (build+features), lenses (leaf shutters), and backs (price).
I'm surprised Hasselblad is still alive and kicking... come to think of it, the Hasselblad we once knew I think died off years ago.