|
glort Offline [X]
|
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Ryan Brenizer just sold his D5 after getting the A9 | |
eke2k6 wrote:
I don't know if you're intentionally being difficult...
I explained it in the very first post. Ryan Brenizer is a top 5 wedding photographer in the world. He literally has techniques named after him. Most importantly, he's as busy as they come. As a result, he's extremely demanding of his gear.
The mirrorless cameras have stereotypically been known as "not ready for prime time", so to me when such a person parts ways with the D5 juggernaut in favor of the A9 it makes one wonder how far we've come and what it means for the industry.
Again, I'm not saying that the guy is "better" than any of you guys, but statistically I bet he shoots far more wedding related frames than most on this forum or in the world.
...Show more →
Actually, that's quite different to what you said in your one line first post but anyway.
I always question a lot of mainstream thinking and attitudes so if you call that being difficult, I'm sure you'd not be alone!
I read your first post and my position is till " So what?".
I wouldn't give a flying duck who is using mirror less or any other bit of gear. I don't know who this guy is and in any event, I'd be far more influenced by another of the "nobodys" here that I would know aren't getting a kickback of some sort and I can rely on their opinion to be honest and from the heart.
Heiko here has bought one. If it's good enough for him, it would be good enough for any wedding shooter I'd say. If I were interested in an A9, I'd be far more interested in what he had to say about them than the fact some other shooter celeb ditched another brand and went elsewhere.
If mirrorless is ready or not for weddings is largely going to be a matter of personal choice the same as using one or the other brands of SLR is. If you or anyone else is going to be influenced by what some celeb shooter is using, good luck to you. I don't doubt many will however and would probably throw a lot of money out the window changing systems again if their pet rock star got a kick back to use and be a mouthpiece for a rival brand tomorrow.
Such is the insecurity of many shooters these days whom have completely forgotten that a good craftsman does not derive his skills and ability's from his tools, but it comes from within and they could still make masterpieces from the most rudimentary and basic tools they had at hand.
My Chef mate has rocked up countless times and offered to cook Dinner and made mouthwatering meals out of what was in the fridge using what equipment was in out Kitchen.
Putting my wife in his kitchen is not going to suddenly improve her culinary abilities.
The question is not whether mirroless is ready for the wedding industry but rather are you ready for mirrorless?
What it means to the industry is just another new camera in the market. They all have their new features that the other manufacturers will copy or exceed when they release a new model.
No big deal here either.
I can't see myself even considering mirrorless in the foreseeable future.
It just doesn't offer any feature or benefit to fulfill any problems or drawbacks with what I have presently which is none.
Firstly, I'm PERFECTLY happy with the SLR's I just updated and don't have any problems with the way they operate or the results they deliver.
More importantly, my clients are well satisfied with what I'm giving them now as well and I can't see them being any more satisfied with the results that came from a Mirrorless cam. Their standards of good and bad are very much different to that of shooters and technical quality is almost a non consideration in what even a P&S camera can deliver these days if used correctly.
2ndly, I consider it bad business over capitalise on equipment and I also consider the price of the A9 and the Sony accessories such as lenses etc to be basically a rip off and unjustifiable.
3rdly, the Mirrorless format or the A9 offer no features or benefits that would come near justifying the expense over what my SLR's deliver, ESPECIALLY to my clients. Mirror less would let me do nothing I can't ( or want) to do right now.
Finally, the mirrorless format or the A9 is not going to bring me more people through my door, cause the clients I have to spend more money or cause them to come back to me more often.
As these are the fundamental principals of building a business and would justify the purchase of any equipment. The fact this gear would have absolutely ZERO effect on my bottom line makes NO financial sense to invest in it.
There are plenty of other things that would be more helpful in that regard both in equipment and non tangibles.
What would be a far more sensible investment for me and I'd guarantee most other shooters here would be to put some money into their marketing and business education. That would benefit them a lifetime and never be superseded by a new model in a year or 2.
It also would make a HUGE difference to their bottom line no matter what gear they went with and potentially make the purchase of such overpriced equipment a lot more justifiable even from a tax write off POV.
From a business consideration, I wonder which cam will have the greater resale value in 3 or 5 years time? My bet is the Nikon ( or similarly priced Canon) will hold it's value far better than the niche Sony.
One has to remember, it's not just a camera we are talking about here, it's the SYSTEM.
Maybe that should have been no.5 on my list of reasons not to change to Mirrorless.
I have so much gear for the current system I have amassed over the years and a whole Myriad of different job types, replacing it all would be a nightmare not only from a financial POV, but also a logistical one. I have made quite a bit of my own gear in the way of adapters, cables, power supplies and other off the wall things I could probably never do it again now because I have forgotten the skills and knowledge it took to build them in the first place.
Perhaps one day shooters ( at least the serious ones) may realise that they would be so much better off investing in themselves and improving their own capabilities both in the long and short term rather than always investing in equipment that will only give them a brief benefit before they move on to some other new bit of technology.
It's not really an argument or a question,each camera/ system has their attributes and drawbacks.
It's just a matter of personal preference over which is better for the individual person.
Now at least the discussion is somewhat relevant! :0)
|
Jun 09, 2017 at 12:49 AM |
| |
|
|