p.1 #1 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
as the popularity of dslr grew, is it a bad thing to professional photographers?
here is something i think might be bad to pros
1. new lens comes feature that they dont really need, and they have to cover the extra cost. Manufacturers would design their lens according to what amateur needs more than what pros need. ex. IS on non telephoto lens.
some pros argue they dont need IS on lens under 200mm focal length. unfortunately, Canon is going to make their new lens (100mm+) all equipped with IS.
2. DSLR is no longer equal to professional. a lot of amateurs use high end DSLR and L lens. pros has to buy more expensive gears if they want to show up their expertise by showing their equipments. of course, if you won awards, that would help.
3. lose business opportunity.
for example, my cousin had wedding last year, but she didnt hire wedding photographer. she did hire a film maker to make a video of her wedding. why she didnt want to hire a wedding photographer? because one of my uncle has D3 + 14-24 + 24-70 + 70-200. my uncle is just an rich amateurs who doesnt make living from photography. of course, the result is not as good as professional photographers, but i would say 70% of pros. now, guess what, my friend is asking me to take photos for his coming wedding on august...
p.1 #2 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
1. There will always be pro lenses and consumer lenses. I don't see why manufacturers would shift their outlook to cater to the amateurs and shun the pros. Just silly since pros are the ones paying the bigger bucks.
2. DSLRs, like many tools of various trades can be owned by anyone. Its the usage and skill of and with them is what earns the money.
3. Same reason with 2. Competition is always there, but results speak for themselves. Skilled shooters will get more work.
p.1 #5 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Uncle Bob type shooters with high end gear will always be there, all you'll get is high resolution crap or mediocre results at best. I've shot many times with "Uncle Bob's" nearby with better gear than mine, but in the end I'm the one getting paid for my skill to capture, not my gear.
p.1 #6 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
1. Non-issue. IS is helpful at all focal lengths, including sub 200mm. Why do you think the 24-105 and 70-200 2.8 IS are such popular lenses? Could you give me an example of how putting IS in a lens is a problem?
2. So you can't as easily just flash your gear and get access to events. Hopefully you've got something more going for you than "guy with big camera."
3. Yeah, the business model changes. If you can shoot well and market yourself well, you'll be able to get enough jobs anyways. Let those who don't want to pay for your services look elsewhere and use whomever fits their needs best. There's still enough jobs to go around. Abundance mentality.
p.1 #7 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I suppose for the working photographer, the prevalence of pro-grade tools to amateurs will always be there-- its the results and expertise that counts.
I can go and buy high end power tools at the Home Depot, but it doesn't mean I can build a house nor even handle a kitchen renovation. Those who think someone who shows up with some "contractor grade" tools means they'll have a quality outcome at the end will just have to see if their roof leaks or their porch caves in.
For me, I'm glad as an amateur I can afford to get some of these tools. I appreciate their quality and I'm happy they are within my price range.
p.1 #8 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
i went to china, hk and taiwan last year, and holy cow...there are soooo many people using dslr. i went to some outdoor model shotting events, and holy cow, a lot of amateurs are using very very good camer and lens. i dont see a lot of people using those $5000 camera and $2000 lens here in Canada. i assume Korea and Japan have the same trend. no doubt, pros buy more prime L lens than amateurs, but for zoom lens like 17-40, 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200, i think it's half half.
of course, you dont need top gears to create good photos.
however, i think as a professional photographer, you need top gears to show your respect to customers and your expertise.
it's like i go to ruth's chris and pay $100 for a steak. they should use prime quality beef even they could make the standard quality beef taste as same as prime quality.
that's respect to your customers.
p.1 #10 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
What exactly is "pros of pros"?
Also, I think it's one of the biggest myths of the photography world that Pro's use "Pro equipment" and Amateurs use "consumer gear". If anything it is the reverse.
The advantages of Professional Photographers is generally not in their gear, but their experience and the time commitment they can put in to photography (and all the benefits of that including better service etc.)
p.1 #11 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
oajlu wrote:
as the popularity of dslr grew, is it a bad thing to professional photographers?
....
3. lose business opportunity.
for example, my cousin had wedding last year, but she didnt hire wedding photographer. she did hire a film maker to make a video of her wedding. why she didnt want to hire a wedding photographer? because one of my uncle has D3 + 14-24 + 24-70 + 70-200. my uncle is just an rich amateurs who doesnt make living from photography. of course, the result is not as good as professional photographers, but i would say 70% of pros. now, guess what, my friend is asking me to take photos for his coming wedding on august...
I have a number of friends who went down the 'friends shooting wedding route' as opposed to engaging a professional photographer and overall they were pleased with the results but it's becoming more and more common.
In other areas having better access to an event gives some protection to the working professional, and I am thinking of motorsport and sport events when I write this. However, more and more amateurs are applying for freelance media access now, to the point where many of the big circuits in the UK won't accept freelance anymore, only agency photographers and those shooting for publications. Even local level motorsport is having to tighten up media access procedures as well, though this is more for safety reasons of not having inexperienced shooters trackside.
p.1 #12 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
My answer is yes. I have lost a great deal of work in the last few years because there is someone 'in-house' who has a decent camera and will work for peanuts.
Sadly (for us older guys) it's a sign of the times that someone with no training or background in photography can buy an expensive camera, obtain decent results and make a living.
I'm not bitter about it particularly, I've had a good run as a pro and after all it's just the way it is, but it's frustrating when the very same people come on sites like this and give poor advice because they don't know any better and consider themselves an expert when all they really are is a user.
p.1 #13 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Just recently starting out as pro I bounced some of those same questions around in my head when I was first starting. In fact, the question I bounced around most often and still do......"Did I pick the wrong time to enter the paid photography scene?"
As I find myself almost a year into it my outlook has changed somewhat as I ask myself all of these questions less often. Why?
I've learned that being paid to take pictures is almost universally more about being a business person first and a photographer second.
Naturally, there are exceptions. But based on actual experience and research I've found that for most part equipment isn't that important. Business sense first, photographer second, equipment last.
Whenever I see an amatuer loaded for bear (on equipment) or I hear how I lost to a job to an "Uncle Bob", I dont' sweat in the least. I know that in the long run they're most likely going to have to be a better business person than I am. I'm finding most aren't.
p.1 #14 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Norwin Uy wrote:
I don't see why manufacturers would shift their outlook to cater to the amateurs and shun the pros. Just silly since pros are the ones paying the bigger bucks.
Put it this way, why steal $1,000 from 100 people when you can steal $10 from 1,000,000 people? In DSLR market, the 1D series body and the L lenses may sell for more $$ but I bet you Canon makes most of its money from the Rebel/xxD bodies and the non L lenses.
p.1 #15 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I just came back from another trip to Rome, Italy and it was amazing to me to see how many novice people were willing to carry a Nikon or Canon Rebel type kit with kit lens and use it as a point and shoot. I just can't understand why people are willing to invest in the money and weight to use DSLR's as point and shoot?!
I agree with n0b0. I don't think the money is really made from the high end bodies/lenses as these are limited in production in some ways (lenses). I too think the money market is in the mid/entry level kits as well as entry to mid-range lenses.
p.1 #16 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
You know, it has pros and cons. We shoot way, WAY more now than we ever did and we sell much more per customer. Each year or so we get a couple of newbie photographers in town that practically give their services away, and they eat away at some of our market. They almost never stick around (and we frequently get customers who went, didn't like the results, and come to us--and I know the other established photographers have the same thing happen).Even though they never stick, there is always a new one, or ones, to take their place. That makes it harder, but again--with digital, we shoot more, we experiment more, and we sell more, so that has more than made up for it at this point.
I think Weddings have taken a bit of a harder hit. A lot of people have a relative do it, and a lot of those people end up very disapointed. It is kind of amusing, actually, because recently we've had a spike in people getting remarried who have said, "I had my uncle/aunt/brother etc" do it last time, and won't make that mistake again!". I constantly see very expensive cameras with very, very inexpensive lenses at weddings. People are shooting with something like 1d series and a 28-135 lens F5.6 lens in terrible light, and I just have to shake my head.
p.1 #17 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
The affordability of the gears only makes the playing field a bit more even. The ones who will take the most hits are the "pros" who produce somewhat mediocre results.
Manufacturers would design their lens according to what amateur needs more than what pros need. ex. IS on non telephoto lens.
I do agree with this to a certain degree. While I have nothing against IS, I sure would like the choice to have the non-IS version and therefore pay less. Same with the Video capture capability in some camera bodies. I wonder how many percent of the 5DII owners have actually used the video to the extent where it's actually worth the money that they paid for. The T1i limited video capability actually put me off from buying one. Why would I want to spend extra money on a half-assed feature that I would hardly use, if ever?
p.1 #18 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I think the hardest part for pros dealing with "Uncle Bob" at weddings is trying to keep them away from the posed shots. It's true that Uncle Bob won't get nearly as good shots as a pro, but if the pro has just finished posing and composing the wedding party and Uncle Bob takes a few shots over the photogs shoulder, he's going to come pretty damn close to what the pro's shot will look like if he's got a decent rig and knows how to use it, especially if there's little or no flash involved. I worked for a couple pro's assisting and doing PP and they all said this is the finest line to tread. You can't make a scene and possibly piss off the clients by getting uppity with Uncle Bob for hanging around, but you CANNOT let him take pictures of your poses or you're going to lose a ton of cash, especially if you are charging for prints and not just a flat appearance fee.
p.1 #19 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Business these days is getting tougher- and we have to try harder and harder to distinguish our work and skill. I think that the improved technology, while a good thing, makes it increasingly easier for a novice photographer to take a decent picture that they would be happy keeping. It's hard to say whether or not they'd purchase one of your pics to start out with, but nonetheless there is the possibility that that was lost revenue. At events, why would someone purchase one of your pictures when they can get a pretty decent one of their own for free?
p.1 #20 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I was once told by a representative of Nikon that consumers feed the pro market. If they had to rely on only pro business they would have been out of business a long time ago. I think you have to sell lots of the high end lenses to pay for r&d and the market is only so big for multi thousand dollar lenses. This is why high end lenses that are taken out of demo service are destroyed and not sold as demo's. They may sell a million p&s cameras and only a few hundred of high end lenses. You may not want to thank Uncle Bob when he is shooting over your shoulder, but he did help in the availability of pro products.
