-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
sumerland
Leading Member
Hi Roman,
just wanted to say that I fully agree with you. One just has to open the eyes and look around - the proof is everywhere.
Cheers,
Torsten
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sumerland
WSSA #91
just wanted to say that I fully agree with you. One just has to open the eyes and look around - the proof is everywhere.
Cheers,
Torsten
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sumerland
WSSA #91
J
jkjond
Guest
thanks for the link - an interesting watch. I'd have taken the 80m offer!
--
http://www.johnleechstudio.co.uk
http://www.johnleechstudio.blogspot.com
--
http://www.johnleechstudio.co.uk
http://www.johnleechstudio.blogspot.com
Josh Jones
Well-known member
I think this debate is just like the whole prime vs zoom debate. I think that people try to pick one side of the fence and state that the other side is completely wrong. While in reality, its not true. You have to meet in the middle.
For instance, it is true that owning a D3S will not make you a professional and owning a D40 will not limit you to being an amateur.
Question: Are there certain circumstances in which a D40 can capture the same printable quality picture of a D3S? Yes, given certain shooting requirements and printing sizes.
Question: Are there times when the D40 is not capable of getting the same shot (at all or consistently) as the D3S. Yes
Question: Are there times in which you can get a shot with a D40 and not the D3S? Yes. Kind of a stretch here, but my thoughts are that you cant get the shot if you dont have the camera on your person. Their are venues in which you can get a D40 in, but not a D3S (b/c the ppl automatically think professional when they see it) and the D40 appears like a larger point and shot (depending on the attached lens, of course). Another reason could be that you are out with your family and dont feel like lugging the large D3S around and dont mind the weight and size of the D40.
With all that said, do I own either a D40 or D3S. No, neither. I have had a D60 and upgraded to the D7000 a while back. The D60 takes excellent photos, but had its limitations, in which I find the D7000 cures just enough for me (personally, the benefit outweighed the cost in my case)
This all seems so logical, but people continually debate the situation so much. I finally, decided I would put my 2 cents in. I am not sure if they are trying to defend their choice of spending thousands on a camera body when their pictures dont reflect that they are using it to its fullest capability or on the flip side, if they are trying to make themselves feel better because they could either not afford or justify the cost of the "higher end" model.
For instance, it is true that owning a D3S will not make you a professional and owning a D40 will not limit you to being an amateur.
Question: Are there certain circumstances in which a D40 can capture the same printable quality picture of a D3S? Yes, given certain shooting requirements and printing sizes.
Question: Are there times when the D40 is not capable of getting the same shot (at all or consistently) as the D3S. Yes
Question: Are there times in which you can get a shot with a D40 and not the D3S? Yes. Kind of a stretch here, but my thoughts are that you cant get the shot if you dont have the camera on your person. Their are venues in which you can get a D40 in, but not a D3S (b/c the ppl automatically think professional when they see it) and the D40 appears like a larger point and shot (depending on the attached lens, of course). Another reason could be that you are out with your family and dont feel like lugging the large D3S around and dont mind the weight and size of the D40.
With all that said, do I own either a D40 or D3S. No, neither. I have had a D60 and upgraded to the D7000 a while back. The D60 takes excellent photos, but had its limitations, in which I find the D7000 cures just enough for me (personally, the benefit outweighed the cost in my case)
This all seems so logical, but people continually debate the situation so much. I finally, decided I would put my 2 cents in. I am not sure if they are trying to defend their choice of spending thousands on a camera body when their pictures dont reflect that they are using it to its fullest capability or on the flip side, if they are trying to make themselves feel better because they could either not afford or justify the cost of the "higher end" model.
I would have, too, IF the offer was truly made. The NOVA piece seemed entirely convincing to me but, apparently, there's still not consensus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Girl_in_Profile_in_Renaissance_Dress
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
I like grain this obsession with plastic images is a misguided one IMO. But it's down to taste
You're still missing the point once you get on the gear tech love affair train you'll be stuck on it forever. They'll be better cameras around in 3 years, so what?
Again it's only making my "makes life easier" point and nothing more. Leaving out crazy examples of using junk cameras, people put too much faith in gear. Lots of bad shots on great cameras only proves this.
What we're talking about is the real event, the main course is the person and not the camera, saying anything else is living in denial I'm afraid.
J
jkjond
Guest
I would take a lot of convincing that its a leonardo. It seems that it must be the missing page from the book, but as discussed earlier in the piece, a forger has to get his authentic vellum from somewhere! I'd be surprised if an offer so high were made, it would be speculative at best - but claiming such and offer was made and rejected seems a cheap move to maintain interest and hike value.
--
http://www.johnleechstudio.co.uk
http://www.johnleechstudio.blogspot.com
ijustdontknow
Well-known member
My final comment on this is, no we can't stop saying the camera doesn't matter. You can. Others on here can argue until they are blue in the face that the camera does matter. That won't make it right.
Either you will understand someday or you won't.
Either you will understand someday or you won't.
Dohmnuill
Leading Member
(Not sure the previous post uploaded)
ENo asked if "we" can stop etc.
Who is "we"? Has he been part of using the saying? When? How often?
Or did he actually mean "you". And just who did he have in mind?
What a pedantic piece of tripe. The saying is a good little reminder to think on the host of other variables which are extremely important for a good snap, and not to get tied down by tech issues or excuses.
So let's mention it more often !
ENo asked if "we" can stop etc.
Who is "we"? Has he been part of using the saying? When? How often?
Or did he actually mean "you". And just who did he have in mind?
What a pedantic piece of tripe. The saying is a good little reminder to think on the host of other variables which are extremely important for a good snap, and not to get tied down by tech issues or excuses.
So let's mention it more often !
Steve_in_FL
Leading Member
Excellent! The camera is just a tool. Good tools make things easier. But the true masters will always get better photos with an iPhone than the hacks will with a D4. And I include myself in the ranks of the hacks.
absentaneous
Forum Enthusiast
wow, you invested all that money for a system when the camera doesn't matter? why didn't simply buy one of those disposable ones? I mean since the camera doesn't matter? so, the camera so doesn't matter that you actually bought all those lenses and even a flash for it. I guess you really enjoy a lot in what doesn't matter.
look, don't mix photography knowledge with equipment. that's the fallacy. D70 didn't make you a better photographer overall but the point is that whatever your level of photography is a camera can help you achieve things more or less or it can even make it impossible for you to achieve things. and again, it really depends on what kind of pictures you were taking and what kind of goals you had. if for example you were shooting action scenes then a D1H would quite help you in taking better pictures because of its faster and more precise focusing system and so on. or if you bought the coolpix 3200 your pictures would look even worse than those taken with the D70 and there would be situations in which the finepix would make it really hard for you to take a picture because of its slow focusing for example.
and no one is saying that having a particular camera matters always. if all you need from a camera is to be able to press the shutter button then whatever happens it happens then the camera really doesn't matter but you can't make a rule out of this like that and say cameras doesn't matter. they matter when they do and they don't when they don't. it depends. but the fact is that not every camera offers the same. it might not matter to have the best camera but it still matters to have a good enough camera. that's why people make particular choices when buying their cameras. because they choose based on what matters for them and so their choices (cameras) do matter.
it's pointless saying a camera can't make you a better photographer because it's obvious that your photography knowledge doesn't depend on the camera but on yourself. but how one is able to put his whatever knowledge into use it pretty much depends on the camera as well. because as you would not say that the level of knowledge doesn't matter you can't also say the level of camera doesn't matter. because both the knowledge and the performance of the camera can be measured. and that can't matter arbitrary it just matters in a different way and for different things.
absentaneous
Forum Enthusiast
wow, you invested all that money for a system when the camera doesn't matter? why didn't simply buy one of those disposable ones? I mean since the camera doesn't matter? so, the camera so doesn't matter that you actually bought all those lenses and even a flash for it. I guess you really enjoy a lot in what doesn't matter.
look, don't mix photography knowledge with equipment. that's the fallacy. D70 didn't make you a better photographer overall but the point is that whatever your level of photography is a camera can help you achieve things more or less or it can even make it impossible for you to achieve things. and again, it really depends on what kind of pictures you were taking and what kind of goals you had. if for example you were shooting action scenes then a D1H would quite help you in taking better pictures because of its faster and more precise focusing system and so on. or if you bought the coolpix 3200 your pictures would look even worse than those taken with the D70 and there would be situations in which the finepix would make it really hard for you to take a picture because of its slow focusing for example.
and no one is saying that having a particular camera matters always. if all you need from a camera is to be able to press the shutter button then whatever happens it happens then the camera really doesn't matter but you can't make a rule out of this like that and say cameras doesn't matter. they matter when they do and they don't when they don't. it depends. but the fact is that not every camera offers the same. it might not matter to have the best camera but it still matters to have a good enough camera. that's why people make particular choices when buying their cameras. because they choose based on what matters for them and so their choices (cameras) do matter.
it's pointless saying a camera can't make you a better photographer because it's obvious that your photography knowledge doesn't depend on the camera but on yourself. but how one is able to put his whatever knowledge into use it pretty much depends on the camera as well. because as you would not say that the level of knowledge doesn't matter you can't also say the level of camera doesn't matter. because both the knowledge and the performance of the camera can be measured. and that can't matter arbitrary it just matters in a different way and for different things. because it's true that a camera won't get a perfect composition on its own but is the same true that no matter what your level of photography is you for example can't shoot 10 fps with a camera which can't do that or you can't take a noise free image at ISO 1600 when the camera can't do that or you can't a shallow DOF when the camera can't do that. so, what you need to realise is that as much a lack of knowledge can limit you also not having the right camera does. that's the point.
sshoihet
Senior Member
It matters because the camera has to be sufficiently capable to accomplish the task at hand. As was already mentioned, it doesn't matter until it does... until you have a scene that surpases the sensor DR, unti you don't have enough resolution to crop as much as you'd like to, until the shutter lag is too great for you to catch the action....
You're also assuming that when I say the camera matters, I mean that it must always be "better" and more expensive. Each camera and lens has it's own character that it lends to a photograph. Not every photograph has to be tack sharp, sometimes a lower resolution can have a higher artistic value. One could have a lens that is horribly soft at it's edges but produces wonderful portraits because of that.
re the 35mm 1.8, I have the G version which I don't find to be all that great but the 50mm f1.8G is very good (probably the sharpest lens i have), esp at f4-f5.6, it's one of my favourite lenses for landscapes. Both suffer quite a bit from CA but oh well
For slow/no action, in bright light, where the DR of the scene is not too large, pretty much any digital camera produced in the last 5 years will produce a nice image. When you start pushing the capabilities of the camera then you're going to start having problems, your keeper rate's going to go down, you're going to miss shots and you're going to have to work a whole lot harder to get the shot. I hardly think that someone can use a D40 or MF camera and then claim that the camera doesn't matter; both are extremely capable.
I've used many cameras over the years, I still use 35mm and MF B&W a bit. I have a Kodak Retina that I love but i wouldn't try to photograph anything that moves with it Before I purchased my DSLR I had a Canon SX10 for just over a year. I believed that the camera didn't matter but after much frustration at not being able to capture many of the type of photographs I like, I finally purchased a DSLR.
It's funny, I can't think of any other profession, trade, hobby, etc. that I've participated in where the message was "your tools don't matter"; it was always "buy the best tools you can afford". I'm sure a master craftsman could whittle me a bedroom set with a jack knife if he wanted to
You're also assuming that when I say the camera matters, I mean that it must always be "better" and more expensive. Each camera and lens has it's own character that it lends to a photograph. Not every photograph has to be tack sharp, sometimes a lower resolution can have a higher artistic value. One could have a lens that is horribly soft at it's edges but produces wonderful portraits because of that.
re the 35mm 1.8, I have the G version which I don't find to be all that great but the 50mm f1.8G is very good (probably the sharpest lens i have), esp at f4-f5.6, it's one of my favourite lenses for landscapes. Both suffer quite a bit from CA but oh well
For slow/no action, in bright light, where the DR of the scene is not too large, pretty much any digital camera produced in the last 5 years will produce a nice image. When you start pushing the capabilities of the camera then you're going to start having problems, your keeper rate's going to go down, you're going to miss shots and you're going to have to work a whole lot harder to get the shot. I hardly think that someone can use a D40 or MF camera and then claim that the camera doesn't matter; both are extremely capable.
I've used many cameras over the years, I still use 35mm and MF B&W a bit. I have a Kodak Retina that I love but i wouldn't try to photograph anything that moves with it
Before I purchased my DSLR I had a Canon SX10 for just over a year. I believed that the camera didn't matter but after much frustration at not being able to capture many of the type of photographs I like, I finally purchased a DSLR.It's funny, I can't think of any other profession, trade, hobby, etc. that I've participated in where the message was "your tools don't matter"; it was always "buy the best tools you can afford". I'm sure a master craftsman could whittle me a bedroom set with a jack knife if he wanted to
Define how it matters then?I'm pretty sure it takes a person with a camera to make a photo.
One could argue that with the significant amount of automation in new cameras, the camera is capable of looking after a far greater portion of the process. The camera only needs some way to be mobile and it might very well capture a fantastic photograph on it's own.
The camer is a lot closer to not needing us than we are to not needing it
I don't believe it's true that the camera doesn't matter. Of course it matters, you could not take the exact same photograph with another camera. Depending on the camera, lens, medium etc the photograph will have it's own character. The camera though is not the only thing that matters and it's not the biggest thing that matters but it does or we'd all be out there with a nike shoe box with a piece of film in it.
So I bought a D90 and I'll take some landscape photos but some would say not using a D3X is wasting my time or I should be shooting MF digital. Had the same when I shoot 35mm film should be using large format.
Avoiding silly extremes (I gave a pinhole example) tell me how it matters that much?
Want to shoot UWA I have a 19-35mm I use for 35mm, not the best ever lens..but not bad. I might get "sharper" shots with a better lens, it would be very naive to say I would get "better" shots
Similarly I got a 35mm f1.8 and I'm sure I'll pick up a 50mm f1.8 too. Are these lenses "too cheap" to get great shots from? I think not myself
I admit I got lucky with the crappy 35mm compact but I simply made the best out of the situation (only camera on me at the time) I got the shot it worked. I might get a better bigger print from a better camera, but I won't get a "better shot"
I'd add the cheap 35mm compact isn't my weapon of choice for landscape photography far from it. But when the chips are down you have to step up to the plate and exceed the limitations you might have.
The way some folks talk on this forum you'd need a FF DSLR, top end glass, a bag full of filters, only the best tripods ever made and a van with a Mac workstation in it to deliver the goods. I find that rather worrying myself
eNo
Forum Pro
Excellent point. Perhaps, for the given photograph, the effect or "look" the photographer desires comes across more powerfully or effectively with the older, less capable camera. Perhaps that desired effect results from a flaw newer camera generations have long ago eliminated. Still, the camera made a difference -- it mattered.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Splash page: http://downeyweddingphotography.com
Gallery and blog: http://imagesbyeduardo.com
Google plus: http://www.gplus.to/imagesbyeduardo
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/imagesbyeduardo/
Many, most, or all of the photos taken do not derive most of their interest, value or purpose from the last ounce of technical excellence that a correctly-used latest model camera might have over and above a correctly-used box brownie, let alone a D40.
The direction in which the camera was pointed always comes higher up the hierachy than the equipment used. And there are one or two other things in there too, not just user skill.
So it's not so much that the camera actually "doesn't matter", more that this phrase is often used in an attempt to demonstrate the actual truth of the situation, which is that there are always other things which matter more.
The direction in which the camera was pointed always comes higher up the hierachy than the equipment used. And there are one or two other things in there too, not just user skill.
So it's not so much that the camera actually "doesn't matter", more that this phrase is often used in an attempt to demonstrate the actual truth of the situation, which is that there are always other things which matter more.
sumerland
Leading Member
Brev00
Forum Pro
to me. I originally bought my D90 because I could not get a usable photo of my daughters' figure skating with my film camera or my point and shoot. The D90 solved that. I am not sure if earlier dslr's like the D40 can even shoot at iso 1600 which is what I sometimes need. One can also say that the camera needs a person to point and shoot. That sounds like we are getting into a chicken and the egg sort of argument. Of course, I matter when it comes to taking ice skating pictures. I don't think it is either/or. Someone else using my kit would not get the same images. I have not gone as far as the op and upgraded to the D7000. Sounds like a nice camera but the improvement would be small compared to my original leap to the D90. The D90 still gets results that satisfy and even thrill me.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brev00
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brev00
Skylane
Leading Member
ijustdontknow
Well-known member
I don't know you and you don't know me. However, I can tell you that if I did know you, I wouldn't like you. You are immature, arrogant, and argumentative. You have done nothing that added any value to your point and are not open to another opinion. Keep thinking that more pixels will make you a better photographer. Keep making stupid statements about how big you can blow your pictures up. Keep thinking that you can take better pictures with better gear. Keep thinking that taking pictures at 10 fps or noiseless shots at 1600 ISO make the photo better. You make me laugh.
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
That would be a more logical phrase to use most would agree there.
Or you could say in the "big picture" 95% of what counts isn't camera it's photographer.
I was looking at Roman's excellent gallery and he's some great shots even with older cameras. They are no less great for that, might not print as well as the newer ones..but still excellent. Seems a D70 can deliver then if we give it to someone who knows what they are doing ;-)
These discussions always end in technical debates. Yes I'll get better prints from better cameras, more shots in focus for sports shots with better cameras. But I won't get better shots..as said a million times they make life easier.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum