-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Pictures in gear ads
- Thread starter HRC2016
- Start date
Prairie Pal
Veteran Member
Olympus em-5 mark1.
The video and print ads with water splashed on the camera and kit lens helped sell it to me.
dougjgreen1
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 4,068
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 2,395
.......How hot the model is in the advertisement.
Last edited:
frozenotter
Well-known member
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 119
Interesting ...the second question followed up the first question but was completely disjointed from it.
To answer both...
1 - yes ....if i know its down to the quality being the same i'll go with the one marketed or "being" more "pretty".
2 - is that savy? the gear is probably theee most important part of the process even though it's generally not a good contributer to one's vanity to admit it.
--
"It's in the sensor, not the megapixels"
"There is only logic and psychology. Realizing and decifering their distinctions is the key to true awareness and understanding"
Last edited:
Bobo Hodls
Veteran Member
It's time to put you on Ignore.
John Sheehy
Veteran Member
Gear is important for many things that can affect photography, despite the fact that a unique photograph can be had with the most minimal gear.
What is disturbing is the fact that restaurants often use stock photos of plates that don't reflect their own recipe. I had to sit across the table from a friend last Sunday who was miffed because the menu photo of the Kung Pao Chicken showed no bamboo and no bell peppers, but lots of scallion, but what he got was not the photo. He had very little scallion, many strips of bamboo, and lots of bell pepper. I would be happy with it, I guess, but according to him, he got tricked into thinking he was getting authentic Kung Pao Chicken by the photo.
I used to get excited by photos of equipment, but these days, I am more impressed by measured specs. If the Canon 7D3 has a stop less read noise at high ISOs and 2 stops less at base, and f/8 AF in all AF points, I will be ripe for an upgrade, even if it looks as ugly as hell, with a burlap finish that collects oil and dead hand skin.
Last edited:
PJPfeiffer
Veteran Member
I use images to augment the written reviews - referring to other than cameras and lenses!
Stew Volt
Veteran Member
I use gear ads to figure out what NOT to buy. For example, the latest "I am" dorkification from Nikon means I'll probably never own any of their products.
Do those of you who look at the images think the images were really taken with the gear being advertised?
The camera is the most important part of the process? Seriously? You're ignoring the light, the lens AND the photographer?
But I guess there are "photographers" who lack talent and must rely on the gear so ...
The camera is the most important part of the process? Seriously? You're ignoring the light, the lens AND the photographer?
But I guess there are "photographers" who lack talent and must rely on the gear so ...
Burnt to a Crisp
Leading Member
- Messages
- 891
- Reaction score
- 442
Their pretentious Df "pure photography" campaign was cringe-worthy.
TacticDesigns
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,446
- Solutions
- 9
- Reaction score
- 3,729
Burnt to a Crisp
Leading Member
- Messages
- 891
- Reaction score
- 442
Bad gear can cripple a talented photographer.
Imagine a talented photographer trying to follow a BIF but unable to lift his D5 over his head without damaging his bones, joints, tendons, and ligaments.
Imagine a talented photographer trying to summit a high peak to photograph a grand vista and having to choose between his oxygen tank and DSLR, but not both! Remember, Galen Rowell outdistanced his peers because he downsized at a time they were hauling unwieldy massive kits.
Imagine a talented photograher being denied access to a venue on account of his carrying a DSLR without the required "Caution: oversize load" tag.
You get the picture.
You're asking two different questions there.
Gear is relatively important, as is camera skills, and so to creativity.
A £15, 2 Mp camera from 2000, like the one I bought from a S/H dealer for house photos (to compare when buying) would not give a skilled photographer as good a picture as a 2015 - 2017 "modern" camera.
Not just the technology has changed but so to have the various algorithms for picture taking and saving.
And then there the first question - anyone who lets adverts influence them is weak minded. All adverts should do is inform a person that "XYZ" is available... then you run off and do some research on it.
And if the camera is good enough to show individual hairs on her....
... head?
Trevor Carpenter
Veteran Member
I don't think I have ever bought anything photographic as a result of an advert. I have bought mainly as a result of information, advice and recommendation. This comes from this and other forums, friends and colleagues and other internet sources, notably youtube. I'm not actually aware of many photographic adverts ever being targeted at me.
Anthony1970
Veteran Member
are just tools for me, i never will decide on a camera by images somewhere on a side or magazine.
THAT is the part so many people seem to forget or never learned.
The camera is just a tool. A good tool can give you good results, a bad tool can break or do a poor job (or damage something).
But the skill in using the tool is in the user's hands (and mind).
A good mechanic can fix your car with a £100 tool box of spanners (& etc).... a poor one will bugger up with a £2000 tool box..
But a good mechanic will be neater and faster with the more expensive tools - presumably they are better made so will not round off nuts or slip or strip screw-heads.
(And then... you can go too far. He doesn't need a £150 000 toolkit with pure titanium spanners and diamond encrusted hammers)
tongue?!
ROFL... you know what these models are like!
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum