All I Can Say Is............

Started Oct 14, 2009 | Discussions thread
Thomas Karlmann
Thomas Karlmann Senior Member • Posts: 2,761
Re: think like a businessman, not a photographer

Teila Day wrote:

jim stirling wrote:

Teila Day wrote:

Magazine print quality is not quite as demanding as you seem to think and I have had dozens of double pages spreads on corporate brochures from the D3.

I've had a few double trucks myself from a 4mp D2hs, which for trade magazines, etc., works fine because readers who aren't photographers couldn't care less about nit picking over the print result. Magazine print isn't overly demanding at all, but it is more demanding than a ink jet print of the same size to my eyes.

For framed prints from weddings you would be hard put to tell the difference as > portraits are one of the least demanding types of photography compared to say > landscape photography. I am not talking from what I have read on the internet, > but what I do every day for my living. For wedding and event work, I want a super > responsive, pro build, pro AF, camera with superb noise performance especially in > real life low light situations, and none of that applies to the 5Dmk2

I'm not a 5d2 lover, but I can see how many do love it. Many wedding shooters like its resolution and softer side.

It's easy for me to tell the difference in prints. We spent over a year looking at 20x30 and larger prints from the 1ds2 (16mp), and remember being let down by the B&W prints, and very disappointed by the colour prints. I became even more disenchanted after viewing the comparable, and larger print sizes from 30+mp backs. The "difference" was too obvious.. even to my old eyes.

The difference is still obvious today when viewing large gallery prints, etc.. I truly fancy large prints at or over 20x30in; whether the prints are fashion, glamour, portraits, or landscape (being the most demanding of resolution), my conclusion is still the same... 16mp doesn't come close to cutting it. 12mp from D2x,or D3 doesn't cut it either (for my taste). 20+mp bodies are walking in the right direction.. and high res MF backs or large sheets of film, so far seem to be the only way for me to get where I want to be when it comes to printing large. Just my preference.

I have my own exhaustive experience to go on; many large sample prints (of our own and borrowed MF files) made for us at several HP and Epson dealers, upsizing every way on the planet we still never got the results that we noticed from larger MF sensors period. If you're only printing 11 by "x"teen, then you'll see less of a difference, although a difference can be seen in an 8x10ish print between a D3 and a 31mp MF back, especially if you're close to the subject, the eye, hair, skin and fabric detail is different.

Without wanting to upset the “I need brigade” if your business cannot “stretch” to D3X then perhaps you do not need it .The issue here is that people “want” the latest toys the hard fact that they do not “need” it is a moot point.

That's akin to saying that a newly divorced woman with 5 kids, who can't afford her own home, doesn't "need" it. There mere fact of not being able to afford something doesn't mean by default that a person doesn't "need" it.

Quite frankly if your business cannot afford a "vital" bit of kit then it is just not earning enough and you are either not good enough or more likely not trying hard enough. I know that sounds a bit harsh but business is harsh, if I wanted to I could buy several D3x cameras but I have no need for them my next business upgrade will be the D4 whenever it comes.

A lot of people can afford the D3x.. but think why should they spend the money when they could make use of a less expensive alternative from Nikon (if Nikon had such an alternative.) I think the D3x is the best from Nikon, the D3 is the best wedding, event, sport camera. I still understand the mumbles from folks wanting more resolution- I'm not talking about those that just want the latest/greatest.

You're not being harsh at all. It just seems to me that you're being very general in the above statement. You seem to think that if you can't afford something, then a person isn't making enough to warrant the need in the first place. In business we learn quickly that sometimes you need a particular (expensive) item, to even initially increase income. The "hole in the bucket" scenario.

Sometimes the other item just requires a lot of money and has nothing to do with how hard a person tries in business.

(e.g.) medical equipment and certified/registered staff; Just because a physician or "group" can't afford it, hardly means that the clinic doesn't need it badly or isn't very profitable..

If you are a wedding, event, pj, wildlife etc photographer and you can’t make a > living using the D3 the problem is not the number of mp it’s you.


Portrait photographers could've "made a living" with a Pentax K1000, but many felt MF film was a better option. I agree with them.

Best to you Jim


How do you rate the D3x for landscape work?
Same question for the Sony a900?

Apply appreciated.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow