The gear you use has as much relationship to the quality of the photography you choose as the quality of Yo-Yo Ma's cello has to his ability to play cello. Namely, not as much as you might hope.
You could sit a total duffer down in front of the world's greatest piano and he'll still suck. You could set a great pianist down in front of a slightly out-of-tune upright and he'll impress the hell out of you.
Ben Horne wrote:
People who enjoy cameras aren't necessarily interested in photography as an art --- and there is nothing wrong with that.
I'll agree with the first part of that, Ben - but the second part begs for a bit more discussion. :-)
RobDickinson wrote:
"I urge, again, avoiding the common illusion that creative work depends on equipment alone, it easy to confuse the hope for accomplishment with the desire to posses superior instruments. It is nonetheless true that quality is an important criterion in evaluating camera equipment, as are durability and function. Inferior equipment will prove to be a false economy in the long run. As his work evolves, the photographer should plan to alter and refine his equipment to meet changing requirements." - Ansel Adams, The Camera
You can make a poor image with any gear.
When I attempt to make a good image I will endeavour to have at my disposal the best and most applicable gear for the task, so if I succeed the results are as good as i can reasonably achieve....Show more →
It is rare to find someone so humble as Ansel Adams in my generation.
Almost all the time people's egos get in the way of this truth.
As I see it it's 50-50.
Having said that I have experience 'buying into' false economy and it almost cost me my 1D4 & 800mm. Never again!
I think it's pretty well understood that buying gear does not improve your craft. I seldom meet someone who thinks it's only about the camera you use.
It's a matter of people loving what they do and there is nothing wrong with taking pleasure in having better, more nuanced tools to do it with. A better computer will not make someone a better programmer. A nicer hammer will not make someone a better carpenter. But there is nothing wrong with wanting better tools with which to engage your craft.
We each have different standards. A compact point and shoot may satisfy one photographer. While another photographer won't be satisfied with anything less than a 5DIII. While another photographer won't be satisfied with anything less than a 4x5 camera. Or 8x10 camera.
But the most important point to remember is that being interested in gear does not mean you are not interested in the craft of photography. The two are not mutually exclusive.
A carpenter's square is crude and commonplace compared to a machinist's rule or micrometer. Give a carpenter a machinist's rule to use as a "finer" tool ... and it'll only slow him down. Give a machinist a carpenter's square and he won't be able to produce the precision he is capable of and needs.
I can use my vernier calipers to cut precision blocks for cutting boards down to .001 inch. Someone else can cut square blocks by using only "stops" and no precision measuring device, and likely be even more square (but not as accurate) than I am with my vernier calilper method.
Sometimes the gear is critical, other times it is the knowledge and technique that is critical, and other times it is only the vision / content that matters. I shoot mostly manual alt primes to get the drawing styles I like ... but sometimes I need the convenience of a zoom or AF, even if it does sacrifice IQ a bit.
But, imo ... no matter the gear (good, better, best), the knowledge and proficiency of its utilization (or lack thereof) can make a "sow's ear out of a silk purse" just as well as it can make a "silk purse out of a sow's ear".
I really like using my 24L TS-E II ... but I can likewise use my Oly 24/2.8 (non-T&S applications).
The virtue of the camera is not the power it has to transform the photographer into an artist, but the impulse it gives him to keep on looking.
-- Brooks Anderson
You know I liked that quote so much I googled it. Funny thing, I think maybe you have Anderson instead of Atkinson. Other sites are making the same mistake (unless I am mistaken). Just sharing this in a minor way of weeding out static off the internets
artd wrote:
I think it's pretty well understood that buying gear does not improve your craft. I seldom meet someone who thinks it's only about the camera you use.
It's a matter of people loving what they do and there is nothing wrong with taking pleasure in having better, more nuanced tools to do it with. A better computer will not make someone a better programmer. A nicer hammer will not make someone a better carpenter. But there is nothing wrong with wanting better tools with which to engage your craft.
We each have different standards. A compact point and shoot may satisfy one photographer. While another photographer won't be satisfied with anything less than a 5DIII. While another photographer won't be satisfied with anything less than a 4x5 camera. Or 8x10 camera.
But the most important point to remember is that being interested in gear does not mean you are not interested in the craft of photography. The two are not mutually exclusive....Show more →
K-mart/Sears hammers never quite cut it when framing, used a few Vaughan framing hammers; wood handles, back in the 70s, best could be gotten, never broke, they're still hangin in my garage, bangin on nails n wood...did they make me feel better using them, yep, did I get better using the right tool, most definitely, was more confident with each swing...Otherwise I just would have bought twenty or more K-Mart specials, lost time breaking them...you buy what you can afford/justify!
lighthawk wrote:
The virtue of the camera is not the power it has to transform the photographer into an artist, but the impulse it gives him to keep on looking.
-- Brooks Anderson
You know I liked that quote so much I googled it. Funny thing, I think maybe you have Anderson instead of Atkinson. Other sites are making the same mistake (unless I am mistaken). Just sharing this in a minor way of weeding out static off the internets
"how many people on sites like this equate owning and using the latest gear as synonymous with being a quality photographer?"
I doubt that many on this forum believe this, but sadly I wonder if the general public do! I have certainly seen advertising for kit that suggests that buying this camera will make your work look more professional.
Certainly an over interest in kit is a potentially a problem, it is easily possible to become more interested in the potential of your kit as opposed to actually using it. In the past I have certainly accumulated far more equipment than I needed (which I assume is a basic symptom of the illness). While at present I am well provided for kitwise, I made a decision to have only one Pelican case, and everything photographic I own must fit into it. If I do want to buy something new, as the case is full something old must be sold off to make room. This attitude has reduced my kit addiction by about 95%!
I also think that your attitude to kit depends to some extent on your photographic interests. If you shoot at f11 under studio flash then to be frank there hasn't been any DSLR by any major manufacturer for years and years that won't give sparkling results. If on the other hand you regularly photograph at high ISO and low light then last years camera may well produce noticeably inferior results to the "latest and greatest". If you regularly photograph in difficult situations then you will most likely be very interested in keeping up with the latest gear, as to be frank modern cameras do give us technical and artistic opportunities that were harder, or impossible, using film or older digital.
Having said that, better kit will only help refine your results, but by itself of course no kit can supply us with photographic vision and imagination, which is entirely the product of our minds.
There are some shots which require kit to produce. High ISO shots require a good body and lens for example. Sports shots require high fps and fantastic focussing. Certain beauty images will require high quality pixels and lots of them.
Other shots don't require much gear at all.
The question is : is my gear or my vision the limiting factor?
"Tools for the job"
(or, break the job down and work out what tools you need to achieve your vision)
Ben Horne wrote:
People who enjoy cameras aren't necessarily interested in photography as an art --- and there is nothing wrong with that.
Yeah - I agree with that. We had a piano at home when I was a kid and I messed about with it at times but I never really learned to play it. I liked just playing with it...
gdanmitchell wrote:
People who enjoy cameras aren't necessarily interested in photography as an art --- and there is nothing wrong with that
I'll agree with the first part of that, Ben - but the second part begs for a bit more discussion. :-)
Dan
It does beg for more discussion; a camera is a gadget (like a PC, Ipad, or whatever) and there is nothing wrong with enjoying cameras for the gadgetyness (not a real word, but you get the idea). Each to their own, but when said gadget freak who's only interested in his 36mp's shows you a cr*p image he/she should be offered honest critique
I get a real buzz looking in my camerabag and seeing the kit sitting there, but I'm pretty sure none of it has improved my photography. It's up to me to practice and learn
Honestly, you do not need great (can be measured) gear to make great (subjective appreciation) images BUT, like some have said, to make certain images you need certain pieces of kit.
Specially interior architecture images or landscapes that require a super-wide angle. Go to Horseshoe bend in Page, Az and dont have at least a 20mm (on full frame) lens? Tough break, you could take multiple images and stitch, but that would be a lot of work. And still might not come out right specially if you are showing the lip of the rim where you are standing (nodal point anyone?) and have clouds moving (photoshop a whole new sky in?).
Want that close-up of a Lion's Face in the savannah and dont have a telephoto lens? You could crop but quality will suffer. Want that perfect bird in flight shot but your camera doesn't have good AF?, yeah, you might get lucky after many many shots but...
If you want to make high quality photographs on a CONSISTENT basis in a wide variety of situations, you need good gear, and not only that, you need to know how to use it extremely well. But, you might get lucky...
To me, the most important things regarding gear are: #1 Having the right lens for the job. #2 having the right lighting equipment, modifiers and or camera support/rigging for the job. #3 having a camera good enough for the job.
Photography is a wonderful hobby in that it can be enjoyed in many ways, and gear is not necessarily the limiting factor - although, as has been pointed out, certain fields of photography, like sports, wildlife, studio etc. aren't possible without the right tools.
However, I think gear can also limit the enjoyment and even prevent a shot from being taken in some circumstances (too much trouble to get the camera out of the bag, wrong lens on camera, camera left at home because it's too much of a hassle to lug it around and so on). There's also the sad possibility that you stop taking pictures with lesser gear, because it's not worth it - you want "only the best or nothing at all".
Current cellphones take great pictures, and I've had a blast using mine recently. Don't know if there is any talent or artistic merit in the images, but I've enjoyed photography nevertheless - even though the gear being used is just a measly phone.
John_T wrote:
There is not a single image in this thread about creating images, so I feel obliged to post one with the quote" "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
Rosy is a wonderful, friendly pig, and in that sense, should be viewed as Rosy, not as a pig.
Rosy has a wonderful, happy face I love the expression you captured (with your awesome brand new camera!)
Until you have experienced the best equipment a particular manufacturer (Canon) has to offer you have no basis for comparison or way to develop a work-around when using something less than the best.
I am better equiped to handle a 10D today because I know the limitations compared to the 1D.
I used to have a Porsche. It didn't make me a better driver. But it gave me a lot of pleasure.
I do remember while I had it, that I would pore over specs, read about it, consider at great length what tires were best for it, which oil I should use, and just had a great time doing all that.
But I didn't buy it because I wanted to become a professional race car driver. It was my hobby for a while and a source of enjoyment which made it well worth the money I spent on it.
I know a girl that plays the piano wunderfull. Her play will be much more faszinating on a bad piano, then a bad players one. But of course it sounds much more wonderful on a great piano that transports her skills much better.
Of course an ambitioned and talented photographer can create great pictures with most gear. And of course he can produce even better ones and a higher hit rate with an advanced camera and greater lenses.
Concerning this funny clip (yes, I think it was funny) driving a Lamborghini does not enhance the drivers skills automatically. But a skilled driver would get better results if it comes to the point of using itīs capabilities, then in driving a VW beatle.
The most experienced and creative photographer will get into trouble to get a sharp picture with a shallow lense. But using a fantastic one does not guaranty that anybody using it produces stunning results.
Anyway, we live in a free world and anybody should be allowed, to decide what his/her needs are.
Concerning me (my needs/wishes) a 5D III, EF 24-105 L and 70-300 L is/would be an excellent basis for now and the next couple of years.
The threads titel maybe should not be "gear vs talent". Good gear never works against talent but for and with it. And missing talent is not enhanced by better gear. Getting more sharp keepers with an enhanced AF system is getting MORE but does not mean automatically getting better photographs.
