Should amatuer buy pro lens?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
lilBuddha Veteran Member • Posts: 4,350
Re: Should amatuer buy pro lens?

imperial wrote:

I can't convince myself enough to buy the Sony 70-200mm gm lens because of the price. I have saved up money for it, but i can't get over the fact that i'm just a amateur photographer and none of these photos I take are going to pay off the equipment i have purchased. Do any of you get this problem?

Yes, I get it and I do make money from my photography. Before I did, when I was first getting into photography seriously, I heard the siren song of pro gear.

Evaluate your budget.  You've saved the money, so you've done this, I'd imagine.

Evaluate your needs. Do you need pro features? Are your images insufficient in a way that a better/different lens would change them?

Evaluate the lenses. Pro does not automatically mean better. It typically means wider apertures, weather sealing and a rugged build. But it does not always mean better image quality.

Evaluate your images. This is part of step two, really, but benefits more specific evaluation. tl;dr: if the technical quality of your images is sufficient to your needs, then you do not need a new lens.

Reading lens reviews, and the comments from mental folks such as we here, one would think that ultimate sharpness and such are the qualifiers of a good image. They are not. If that matters to you, and your current images do not live up to your expectation, then a lens with those characteristics is something to consider. But there is much more to photography than that. So, what matters to you?

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