Jim Victory wrote:
I don't know about you but my customers, mainly corporate, are continually wanting higher resolution files and most have started using MF file sizes for their needs. I can't offer a 10MP file when 21MP or 36MP files are now available.
So the equipment does have an impact even if it doesn't make me take a better picture. It does produce a file that meets the size and resolution requirement of my customer.
Jim
Lol, corporate clients are ridiculous, usually the images just end up on their website in thumbnail resolution.
twistedlim wrote:
I feel for you Jim and everyone who has to sell images to make a living. At what point does the MP race push you out of business? How can you upgrade bodies every year or two at 4-5k a pop and still make money? A customer who looks at the file size instead of the quality of work has his/her priorities mixed up...unless you are blowing up images for the side of a bus. Man I am lost here.
Bottom line they don't need it but try and convince them when their competitors are wanting the same. Sure at some point I'll lose my business to MF but some of these customers I have had for over 20 years. The cycle of buying new gear is not that bad and you do have the ability to write off the cost.
Monito I have used MF in the past but other factions of my business requires the use of a 35mm. There is no reason not to be able to use a 35mm for both or is that whining too.
twistedlim wrote:
I feel for you Jim and everyone who has to sell images to make a living. At what point does the MP race push you out of business? How can you upgrade bodies every year or two at 4-5k a pop and still make money? A customer who looks at the file size instead of the quality of work has his/her priorities mixed up...unless you are blowing up images for the side of a bus. Man I am lost here.
If Jim is trying to remain with a 10mp camera in a business which demands high res files ..then I don't feel for him.
the MP race is not the one putting you out of business. Bad planning will put you out of business..
As far as I know new bodies come along every 3-4 years (bodies worth looking at).
Lenses last MUCH longe. So we're not talking about 4-5k ever 1 or 2 years...
And for somebody who is making a living from events (weddings & stuff) ..and who is earning well,trust me, there isn't that much of a drama upgrading his body once every 3 years...It's not like he's earning 5000 $ per year....
twistedlim wrote:
I feel for you Jim and everyone who has to sell images to make a living. At what point does the MP race push you out of business? How can you upgrade bodies every year or two at 4-5k a pop and still make money? A customer who looks at the file size instead of the quality of work has his/her priorities mixed up...unless you are blowing up images for the side of a bus. Man I am lost here.
Jim Victory wrote:
Monito I have used MF in the past but other factions of my business requires the use of a 35mm. There is no reason not to be able to use a 35mm for both or is that whining too.
Actually, you have written more cogently on this thread than most of the last one thousand posts in the Canon forum, so I apologize for associating you with the whiners.
Clients can be hard to educate. In many ways they are rather like the moaners and groaners on gear forums. They go by numbers and think bigger is better, but they think they have a right to get it for the same price or less. Shifting markets are hard to deal with and professional photographers have to be nimble in one way or another.
cineski wrote:
Actually, gear CAN keep you competitive in the market. I'd much rather have clean ISO 6400-12800 so I can shoot avail light in dark locations with perfect results. I'd rather have 14 stops of dynamic range (even more if possible). I'd rather have crystal clean shadows so I can shoot for highlights and expose in post. I'd rather have fantastic auto focus so I can nail the shot in tricky lighting. I'd rather have video (I shoot 5D1) so I can do some multi-media. All this translates to better and better ways for me to express my photography without gear being the limiting factor....which ultimately helps book more jobs....Show more →
Gear can only fool you to think it will somehow transform you in a better photographer.
I'm not here to deny the importance of GEAR. I'm just here to say that we're making a much bigger deal regarding gear.
If you shoot in broad daylight do you think your customers will EVER tell the difference between a 5Dc shot and a 5D II one?
The things you mentioned are the ones concerning me as well (higher clean iso, better AF and better DR).
But if you make a living out of this....there's no point in whining because SURELY you will be ABLE to buy the new body which comes along and delivers this.
I think you over estimate the client's perception on gear (results)
adrianb wrote:
If Jim is trying to remain with a 10mp camera in a business which demands high res files ..then I don't feel for him.
the MP race is not the one putting you out of business. Bad planning will put you out of business..
As far as I know new bodies come along every 3-4 years (bodies worth looking at).
Lenses last MUCH longe. So we're not talking about 4-5k ever 1 or 2 years...
And for somebody who is making a living from events (weddings & stuff) ..and who is earning well,trust me, there isn't that much of a drama upgrading his body once every 3 years...It's not like he's earning 5000 $ per year.......Show more →
Sorry but I have a 5D MKII and 1DsMKIII for high resolution work. The 10MP reference was where I was before the 21MP became available and when my clients wanted bigger files. I did have a 1Ds @ 16MP too. My guess they will express the same when the 36MP D800 hits the street.
Do they really need files this big? Probably not but as I said before try to convince them of this when their rivals are using high resolution files bigger than theirs.
Back to the issue at hand. Lets see if Canon steps up to the plate and then we will have something to discuss.
juicer wrote:
Most people don't think the D800 will make them better photographers, they just think they are getting more for their hard earned money.
Exactly right. I'm watching for the 5DmkIII not to buy one - I'm getting a 1D-X, probably - but to see if Canon thinks they can give their customers the finger again, like they did with the AF in the 5DmkII. Hopefully not.
Jim Victory wrote:
Sorry but I have a 5D MKII and 1DsMKIII for high resolution work. The 10MP reference was where I was before the 21MP became available and when my clients wanted bigger files. My guess they will express the same when the 36MP D800 hits the street.
Do they really need files this big? Probably not but as I said before try to convince them of this when their rivals are using high resolution files bigger than theirs.
Back to the issue at hand. Lets see if Canon steps up to the plate and then we will have something to discuss.
Jim
Jim I know that for us photographers ...sometimes there is no point explaining that to the clients (that they don't need THAT large files) or explaining technical stuff......and I feel for you regarding the fact that some might turn to the competition who's offering 36mp +
But I cannot believe that on a professional level, the clients are the retarded people we're trying to make them look like... I'm sure they care more about the OTHER aspects of photography rather than FILE size/resolution.
The only true reason for them to worry about file size/resolution is LARGE prints......because if we're talking about web use, it's ridiculous
Jim Victory wrote:
I have watched the leap frogging over the years with Nikon and I have stayed on board knowing that it would swing around again but the gap is starting to get too big.
Artsupreme has a point about the fact that Nikon has two generations of the D700 and now D800 with features found in their Pro line and Canon has yet to introduce any camera with these features except their Pro line. I simply don't understand why Canon continues to follow this trend and I'm not the only long time user that is getting fed up.
Jim
This sums it up quite well. Canon has to deliver now - I am curious what features the 5D II successor has to offer. Maybe the D800 changes Canon's former game plan by crippling some features but to release a fully competitive camera instead. I certainly hope so.
I have to give Canon that they at least updated some EF prime lenses. Recently only L primes were updated.
Monito wrote:
So, pro-up and sell-up and buy Medium Format instead of amateur dramatics. (Amateur dramatics not from you, but from the OP.) If you can justify it after planning it out business-wise, just do it.
Yes, I should be forced to switch, loose time and money in the process and learn an entirely new system or spend tens of thousands of dollars more on MF/LF, which is ill equipped in many facets for my type of work, because a company decided to purposely stiff arm many of their user base. I depend on photography to make a living and for me it would not make financial sense to sell of all my camera equipment to switch systems. Do I feel I need or deserve the latest and the greatest? No, not at all, but it's quite natural, after seeing what one company can offer over another when both the means, to feel slighted, especially after investing large sums of money. I do realize this revolves around numbers, studies, business models etc etc but as a consumer I don't give a damn about that. Offer me a competitive, quality product and you get my business. Refuse to do so and I'll exercise my opinion where ever and how ever I want--I expect others to do the same rather than standing by bahhing like sheep or blindly/ignorantly defending a huge corporation. Call it bitching, call it whining, I could care less what anyone wants to call it.
I'm kinda confused, you're agreeing to agree with me? 5 years ago, we could not do the things we can today with photography. Namely with low light. Today, with the advent of clean extreme high ISO, it has the power to morph photographer's own creativity to take full advantage of new capabilities to do things we were never able to do. When you can suddenly shoot clean ISO 102,400, I'm sure the average photographer will think of things they can do and brand new ways of expressing themselves in ways they couldn't have done before. The really good ones will dazzle with new ways to tell a story. Does this make a person more marketable? I think so.
And yes, most clients cannot tell the difference between a 5D and 5D2 (unless it's a 5D2 image shot at ISO 3200 in a difficult lighting situation which the 5D2 is slightly better at). However, most clients can tell the difference between a shot on a digital camera and that from a medium format film camera. They look vastly different. There is absolutely nothing wrong with expecting the best from your gear and wanting the company who makes your gear to respectfully not play marketing games with the tools that you make a living with. Marketing games that can cause a downfall in the quality of your imagery like crippled auto focus. I'm holding on to things until the 5D3 is announced. If it doesn't live up to par I'm thinking of switching to Nikon. Is the 1DX amazing? I hope so, but I'm not going to spend $14000 on two bodies.
Regardless of what a client thinks, I simply want photographic gear that puts little to no limitations on what my imagination can conger up. Better gear simply allows me to be better. Otherwise I'd be happily shooting a 10D.
adrianb wrote:
Gear can only fool you to think it will somehow transform you in a better photographer.
I'm not here to deny the importance of GEAR. I'm just here to say that we're making a much bigger deal regarding gear.
If you shoot in broad daylight do you think your customers will EVER tell the difference between a 5Dc shot and a 5D II one?
The things you mentioned are the ones concerning me as well (higher clean iso, better AF and better DR).
But if you make a living out of this....there's no point in whining because SURELY you will be ABLE to buy the new body which comes along and delivers this.
I think you over estimate the client's perception on gear (results)...Show more →
M Vers wrote:
Yes, I should be forced to switch, loose time and money in the process and learn an entirely new system or spend tens of thousands of dollars more on MF/LF, which is ill equipped in many facets for my type of work, because a company decided to purposely stiff arm many of their user base. I depend on photography to make a living and for me it would not make financial sense to sell of all my camera equipment to switch systems. Do I feel I need or deserve the latest and the greatest? No, not at all, but it's quite natural, after seeing what one company can offer over another when both the means, to feel slighted, especially after investing large sums of money. I do realize this revolves around numbers, studies, business models etc etc but as a consumer I don't give a damn about that. Offer me a competitive, quality product and you get my business. Refuse to do so and I'll exercise my opinion where ever and how ever I want--I expect others to do the same rather than standing by bahhing like sheep or blindly/ignorantly defending a huge corporation. Call it bitching, call it whining, I could care less what anyone wants to call it....Show more →
God damn it..... It's 'I COULDN'T CARE LESS'.
Surely you can see the irony in saying you could care less when you are trying to use a statement that implies you care about as little as can be, hence saying I couldn't care less meaning that you already care to the lowest possible extent.
Apart from this I agree implicitly with your statements.
You are comparing a three-year-old camera model with one that has been announced today and is not yet available. Unless you don't believe in product evolution, there are explanations besides incompetence and misleading/cheating customers that would account for the camera released three years later having improved features.
The Nikon sounds like a really great camera, and if I were a Nikon shooter I'd be all over it.
Dan
artsupreme wrote:
What are all the fanboys going to say now?
"If you want pro features, buy a 1D series"
"5DII AF is perfectly sufficient for the price point"
"If you want a FF body with pro AF then buy a 1DSIII and stop complaining!!!"
"If you think you could ever get the best AF in a compact body for 3K you are dreaming!!!"
"You want a 6K camera for 3K, (hahaahaha) you are dreaming!!!"
This list could go on for days....3+ years of this bullshit.
So you had a MP argument against the D700, but what now?
Well, let's hope Canon FINALLY delivers a body that's not intentionally crippled!...Show more →
I agree with almost everything you've said, with the exception of being stiff armed. A lot of people gave canon shit for going into higher mp count cameras and applauded Nikon in that 12 or whatever "sweet spot".
I also think that, yes, if you want medium format functionality that you need to buy medium format. If your business justifies it, it lays for itself. If your business does not, then you either need to restructure or intersect into new markets.
I am not trying to be argumentative, just the point that I'm trying to make I suppose is, is it a companies responsibility to give us everything for nothing? I like the way you made your point and I think it is well delivered.M Vers wrote:
Yes, I should be forced to switch, loose time and money in the process and learn an entirely new system or spend tens of thousands of dollars more on MF/LF, which is ill equipped in many facets for my type of work, because a company decided to purposely stiff arm many of their user base. I depend on photography to make a living and for me it would not make financial sense to sell of all my camera equipment to switch systems. Do I feel I need or deserve the latest and the greatest? No, not at all, but it's quite natural, after seeing what one company can offer over another when both the means, to feel slighted, especially after investing large sums of money. I do realize this revolves around numbers, studies, business models etc etc but as a consumer I don't give a damn about that. Offer me a competitive, quality product and you get my business. Refuse to do so and I'll exercise my opinion where ever and how ever I want--I expect others to do the same rather than standing by bahhing like sheep or blindly/ignorantly defending a huge corporation. Call it bitching, call it whining, I could care less what anyone wants to call it....Show more →
