Nikon: A photographer is only as good as the equipment he uses!!!

I've often said it, but he it is again......

It's not the CPU in the camera that makes a photograph....it's the one located about 4" behind the view finder.

terry
--
Graham Fine Art Photography
http://www.pbase.com/windancer
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham
See my profile for all my equipment.

Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise. ;-)
 
Actually, I agree with Nikon, which is not to say that Nikon gear is the only good gear since there is a lot of good gear on the market today. This is why I agree.

When we shot film it made little difference what camera we used. The quality of the captured image had a lot to do with the film we selected. With digital our "film" is built into the camera's sensor and image processing algorithms. An inferior quality sensor can and likely will mean inferior quality images.

The came is a box on which you attach a lens. I once owned the 24-120/3.5-5.6 VR. It was a sick dog!! I sold it a couple of weeks after purchase. I now own the 24-120/4 VRand 24-70/2.8 VR. Did these lenses make me a better photographer than the earlier 24-120? Yes, they did because the images I created had higher IQ, and my clients rate my skills based upon the images they receive. I make better images (technically) with better gear, and while aesthetics counts a great deal so does technical IQ.

We are what we eat!

--
Richard Weisgrau
http://www.weisgrau.com
Author of
The Real Business of Photography
The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating
Selling Your Photography
Licensing Photography
 
What you said is true, to make consistently good pictures you need appropriate gear too, but saying photographer is only as good as his gear is a bit faulty. You can give best gear to a very skilled photographer and a non skilled one, you might see the difference there.

These days if you shoot at ISO 200 there is almost no difference between the pictures produced by any cameras, given you expose well. The differentiating factor is obviously the lens but the most critical thing to any photography is the quality of light. If you have good quality light even a point and shoot can produce images as good as a pro dslr. A pro dslr will show its might in difficult lighting conditions but this understanding of light is critical to producing any good pictures.

Another thing that is completely not addressed these days is the importance of post processing skills. It is almost as important as your gear itself. You may have the best of the gear but if you are zero at PP your images will look pretty boring. On the other hand if your PP skills are good and you have a camera with at least RAW capacity, you can produce amazing images.

So in the end, camera gear is important but your skill as a photographer is paramount.
Actually, I agree with Nikon, which is not to say that Nikon gear is the only good gear since there is a lot of good gear on the market today. This is why I agree.

When we shot film it made little difference what camera we used. The quality of the captured image had a lot to do with the film we selected. With digital our "film" is built into the camera's sensor and image processing algorithms. An inferior quality sensor can and likely will mean inferior quality images.

The came is a box on which you attach a lens. I once owned the 24-120/3.5-5.6 VR. It was a sick dog!! I sold it a couple of weeks after purchase. I now own the 24-120/4 VRand 24-70/2.8 VR. Did these lenses make me a better photographer than the earlier 24-120? Yes, they did because the images I created had higher IQ, and my clients rate my skills based upon the images they receive. I make better images (technically) with better gear, and while aesthetics counts a great deal so does technical IQ.

We are what we eat!

--
Richard Weisgrau
http://www.weisgrau.com
Author of
The Real Business of Photography
The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating
Selling Your Photography
Licensing Photography
--
======================================
http://www.flickr.com/photos/divdude007/
======================================
 
I do not think we will ever hear Nikon say: "The brand and model camera you use is irrelevant to a good photographer" :-)

Having said that, I do agree to the extent that with great equipment a photgrapher has a better chance to produce her/his best. Otherwise why spend thousands on Gold Rings, and worry so much about sharpness? IQ, etc?

O
 
Perhaps the original statement needs an amendment:

A photographer is only as good as the equipment he uses.

The equipment's technical capacity is as good as the competence of the photographer.
What you said is true, to make consistently good pictures you need appropriate gear too, but saying photographer is only as good as his gear is a bit faulty. You can give best gear to a very skilled photographer and a non skilled one, you might see the difference there.

These days if you shoot at ISO 200 there is almost no difference between the pictures produced by any cameras, given you expose well. The differentiating factor is obviously the lens but the most critical thing to any photography is the quality of light. If you have good quality light even a point and shoot can produce images as good as a pro dslr. A pro dslr will show its might in difficult lighting conditions but this understanding of light is critical to producing any good pictures.

Another thing that is completely not addressed these days is the importance of post processing skills. It is almost as important as your gear itself. You may have the best of the gear but if you are zero at PP your images will look pretty boring. On the other hand if your PP skills are good and you have a camera with at least RAW capacity, you can produce amazing images.

So in the end, camera gear is important but your skill as a photographer is paramount.
Actually, I agree with Nikon, which is not to say that Nikon gear is the only good gear since there is a lot of good gear on the market today. This is why I agree.

When we shot film it made little difference what camera we used. The quality of the captured image had a lot to do with the film we selected. With digital our "film" is built into the camera's sensor and image processing algorithms. An inferior quality sensor can and likely will mean inferior quality images.

The came is a box on which you attach a lens. I once owned the 24-120/3.5-5.6 VR. It was a sick dog!! I sold it a couple of weeks after purchase. I now own the 24-120/4 VRand 24-70/2.8 VR. Did these lenses make me a better photographer than the earlier 24-120? Yes, they did because the images I created had higher IQ, and my clients rate my skills based upon the images they receive. I make better images (technically) with better gear, and while aesthetics counts a great deal so does technical IQ.

We are what we eat!

--
Richard Weisgrau
http://www.weisgrau.com
Author of
The Real Business of Photography
The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating
Selling Your Photography
Licensing Photography
--
======================================
http://www.flickr.com/photos/divdude007/
======================================
--
'Good artists copy, great artists steals.' - Picasso
 
Oh please... a photographer's abilities are completely unrelated to the gear he uses. The output quality he produces may be limited by very poor gear, but most of the time, I'd prefer a good photographer with average gear over a poor one with excellent gear.
 
A top photographer with an average camera will take better pictures than an average photographer with a top camera.

But a top photographer with a top camera will beat them both!

--
http://www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk
 
Catchy one-liners seldom serve to describe reality.

No matter how great photog you are you can't create the same dof using a 2.8 lens as the guy using the 1.4 lens for the same composition.

No matter how great your equipment is it won't help you make compositional decisions.
 


Clearly Nikon has spotted the problem, the dog just needs a D3S and 70-200.
 
My moneys on the sedan, if there's a turn. Even many pretty good drivers would struggle to maintain enough speed to keep the tires warm and wing pushing enough downforce to enable turns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGUZJVY-sHo

Skip to 5 minutes to just see someone drive an F1 car for the first time. Richard Hammond may not be the best driver, but I'm sure he's better than the average dpreviewer. There's an exceedingly high likelihood the new driver of the F1 doesn't leave the start line or will soon be in the ditch, and the family sedan would win.
 
I do not think we will ever hear Nikon say: "The brand and model camera you use is irrelevant to a good photographer" :-)

Having said that, I do agree to the extent that with great equipment a photgrapher has a better chance to produce her/his best. Otherwise why spend thousands on Gold Rings, and worry so much about sharpness? IQ, etc?
Because you have more money than photographic talent. :)
--
http://www.wanderinground.wordpress.com
http://www.pbase.com/happypoppeye

It's almost all opinion folks, gonna have to deal with it.

Equipment: 1 Finger, an eye, a camera body and 50mm (equivalent) lens, half a brain, and a lot of money leftover to spend on using that equipment
 
LOL :-)
 
Why people are up in arms about Nikon's remarks.

Is it not completely obvious that they were just saying it's important to have the appropriate equipment!

And furthermore their point is proved by virtually everyone on here who buys any specific camera equipment, rather than the cheapest most simple camera available.

No matter how anyone tries to justify the outcry to me I wont get it, Im not being ignorant or insensitive just logical.

Tony
 
But after a few hours he will be a better driver, while the equipment remains the same. And there's definetely smaller difference between D3100 and D3x than between family car and F1 bolid...

BTW, I've seen lots of fantastic images taken with pinholes, lens babies and other stuff like that. To be fair, one of my favourite color renditions is Polaroid... XXL polaroid image taken through pinhole "lens" was for me really something important...
--
Marcin_3M
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top