My opinion is that the 80/20 rules applies. 80% is the photographer, 20% is the equipment, but ONLY if the photographer has the knowledge and skill to take advantage of what capability the equipment offers. Of course, Nikon does not sell lenses by suggesting you improve your skills first.
It also depends on the genre you're shooting for. Fine art is possible -- and sellable -- with an iPhone 3G camera. I've done it. I don't know how many National Geographic spreads are going to get sold taken with a 3G, though, but I don't think it's impossible. A good photographer is always better than the equipment.
My opinion is that the 80/20 rules applies. 80% is the photographer, 20% is the equipment, but ONLY if the photographer has the knowledge and skill to take advantage of what capability the equipment offers. Of course, Nikon does not sell lenses by suggesting you improve your skills first.
Odd post from a guy sporting 8 lenses in his arsenal.....
Seriously it depends on what you shoot. I assure you there are sections of photography where the equipment is just as important or more so then the photographer. If you don't believe it follow me into some gyms or field sports with your Digital Rebel and any lens in your kit. Where the ambient lighting is 10000 iso, 1/400th, and F2.
It also depends on the genre you're shooting for. Fine art is possible -- and sellable -- with an iPhone 3G camera. I've done it. I don't know how many National Geographic spreads are going to get sold taken with a 3G, though, but I don't think it's impossible. A good photographer is always better than the equipment.
I don't think you can say a photographer is "better" or "worse" than the equipment. I think good photographers know their equipment and exploit the equipment's strengths and limitations to create. Different equipment has a different set of strengths and limitations.
My opinion is that the 80/20 rules applies. 80% is the photographer, 20% is the equipment, but ONLY if the photographer has the knowledge and skill to take advantage of what capability the equipment offers. Of course, Nikon does not sell lenses by suggesting you improve your skills first.
I think it was just a poorly written post that was actually meant to elicit some responses from photographers talking about some of the things they were able to accomplish because of their equipment. Kind of a *geek I heart my macro lens* sound off. But the delivery went all wonky.
being a great photographer is (obviously) really important for taking good photos,
but if you give a great photographer a point and shoot and ask him to take a large landscape picture or a macro of a bee or a bird 200 feet away, the shots will be very limited in their "goodness"
[quote=Yo_Spiff] Odd post from a guy sporting 8 lenses in his arsenal.....
And not a piece of L glass in the bunch. Some of those lenses are near duplicates of functionality and have actually been handed down to my wife. A couple are on semi-permanent loan to TGbooklover.
It has always been my belief that cameras and lenses are tools. We as photographers should know how to use the tools we have to get the results we want. This was more true in the days of film, but now with technology growing at alarming rates, very soon people wont have to take a photo in focus, just manipulate it in the computer later to get the focus where you want. But these are all tools. You can't hand Joe from the corner a D3s or 1Dmk4 and expect him to take a great photo, even with top notch glass. You have to know how to use the tool that is in your hand. If you give a plumber a scaple, will he know how to use it. We the photographers are the most important part of the equation when taking a photo. We have an idea in our head, we then translate that idea into reality using our tools, the camera and lens. Take away one part of the equation and nothing works.
It also depends on the genre you're shooting for. Fine art is possible -- and sellable -- with an iPhone 3G camera. I've done it. I don't know how many National Geographic spreads are going to get sold taken with a 3G, though, but I don't think it's impossible. A good photographer is always better than the equipment.
Originally posted by Spork99:
I don't think you can say a photographer is "better" or "worse" than the equipment. I think good photographers know their equipment and exploit the equipment's strengths and limitations to create. Different equipment has a different set of strengths and limitations.
As an owner of a D2x and a D7000 I seriously agree with that.....my D2x is nothing short of fabulous under ideal lighting conditions, yet my D7000 blows it away in lower light scenarios.
With the four different bodies I have, each one has specific strengths and weaknesses that when explored, or compensated for, provide beautiful results.....
It's funny.....my best scoring image to date was taken with my old D70s, decidedly an entry-level DSLR.....from quite some time ago....
And one of my favorite images, which I have enlarged to 36"x66", is with that same D70s.
I don't care what people says... The gear is a HUGE part of photography..
Go ahead... Shoot me for not thinking it isn't 100% the photographer...
I could try to shoot you, but I would probably miss with even the most sophisticated automatic weapon. Jet Li, on the other hand, could wipe you out with a chopstick.
I don't care what people says... The gear is a HUGE part of photography..
Go ahead... Shoot me for not thinking it isn't 100% the photographer...
Eh, eh? What's that? Come a little closer while I decide which p & s to use, or whether I might try the box.
Hmm.. dunno, I seem to "own" both the S90 and the S95 here.. guess that either I am good with any gear, or that I really just don't know how to use my "good" gear... amazing what this tiny pocket cam can do.
I would like to go one step further than what has already been said:
Without the GEAR there is NO PHOTOGRAPHY. . .
So, obviously, pretty important. As a guy who has been slowly working up his skill level and training on editing techniques etc., my experience tells me that gear is pretty important. Don't get me wrong. . .if you don't have an "eye" for photography you can be bungling around with the highest-end camera and lenses in the world and not get a decent shot. However, the equipment you have at your disposal does create limitations. For instance, I have no Macro Lens. . .I have a ring extender for the camera though. . .but it only does so much. Any extreme close ups I have done have not scored well, because no matter how well I compose the subject matter, the equipment will not allow awesome crisp shots. My Tamron lens also starts at 28mm. . .I can't shoot as wide angle as I would have liked on many occasions. I really wish the Canon Fairy would show up and give me a standard 15 to 55 mm Canon lens (LOL). But, as I am sure that won't happen, I once again have to shoot within my limitations. But, those limitations can decide what and how I shoot, thus negating some natural creativity I would like to apply.
That said, I am thankful to have what I have, and have seen people shoot better than me with my level of equipment. . . As soon as I can afford it (god knows when) I will be upgrading to a D60. . . But, this time of learning on my 1000d has taught me a lot about creative editing and scene control for shots. So, overall a big plus.
I don't care what people says... The gear is a HUGE part of photography..
Go ahead... Shoot me for not thinking it isn't 100% the photographer...
Eh, eh? What's that? Come a little closer while I decide which p & s to use, or whether I might try the box.
Hmm.. dunno, I seem to "own" both the S90 and the S95 here.. guess that either I am good with any gear, or that I really just don't know how to use my "good" gear... amazing what this tiny pocket cam can do.
Ahhh, thats why you always walk around with your hands in your pockets.
I do not think it really matters. Photography is not the gear used any more then painting is the paint brush used.
I don't care what people says... The gear is a HUGE part of photography..
Go ahead... Shoot me for not thinking it isn't 100% the photographer...
I could try to shoot you, but I would probably miss with even the most sophisticated automatic weapon. Jet Li, on the other hand, could wipe you out with a chopstick.
Jet Li...pish...Chuck Norris wouldn't need more than an angry glance.
I don't care what people says... The gear is a HUGE part of photography..
Go ahead... Shoot me for not thinking it isn't 100% the photographer...
I could try to shoot you, but I would probably miss with even the most sophisticated automatic weapon. Jet Li, on the other hand, could wipe you out with a chopstick.
Jet Li...pish...Chuck Norris wouldn't need more than an angry glance.
Without the photographer, there is no photography.
So?
This is my point. I find the gear almost as important as the photographer. Yes, I agree that the photographer needs to know how to use the equipment he has. That is not a hidden fact in the world of photography. I just find it as a huge part in getting better photos.
If it wasn't the case, we would all be using low budget equipment and still get the high end quality that we get with our more expensive cameras.
