Anything you buy is good enough - discuss !!!

DiddyDave

DiddyDave

Suspended / Banned
Messages
9,521
Edit My Images
Yes
I often get asked about equipment purchases & for recommendations - but I know sweet FA about such as I only read up on gear when I NEED to buy something - so a few thoughts to help others, or perhaps just fuel an argument :D

1 - if it's all you can afford it is the RIGHT purchase for you now :)

example - a few years ago I wanted the very best Pro spec Wedding camera available, and that was simply the Nikon D2Xs - everyone agreed it had the very BEST of everything you'd ever need - so £3,400 spent willingly :thumbs:

A little over a year later it was considered by many to be crap as the newer Nikons were soooooooo much better at higher ISO due to the advent of 'full-frame' - something Nikon had suggested they wouldn't do

Prior to that I had the Pro spec D100 - the dog's danglies :) which was quickly surpassed by the D2Xs

Now full-frame users will be loving their high ISO D3 - which has been surpassed by the D3s - which will no doubt the shaded into 'olde worlde' by the D4 when it comes out and God only knows what the D5, D6 will deliver :eek:

So my point is... if all you can afford is the XXX then I'm damn well sure it'll do all you ever really need of it as there are no crap cameras these days or even crap lenses relative to their use

i.e. - you are a keen tog with a desire to capture the odd birdy - then a super-zoom 50-500mm will do as you are never going to sell that image 5ft tall. But if you are a Pro birdie tog then a dedicated 500mm f4 and converter etc. may be the only way to achieve acceptable IQ for the mag you're aiming to sell to

Sigmas's 10-20 is FAB on a D40 for private use, whereas a 14-24 on a D3s may be needed for an image to adorn the side of a lorry - but better still a Blad 60mb composite

So if you shoot for yourself - then whatever you can afford is GOOD ENOUGH for up to A3 these days

Only if you shoot in crappy conditions or need prints bigger than A3 (or significantly cropped into) do you really NEED the latest bestest gear

I shoot Weddings for a living - on a (relatively now) lowly D300 - absolutely NONE of the images shot at 1,600 ISO or higher have EVER been used as prints or for an album anything bigger than a 10x8" - which means they are all significant reductions in size over their native 300 dpi - which means noise isn't really an issue

In my film days noise (grain) was a 'character' of the image as film couldn't handle it anyway - and still can't - so - DO NOT worry about it is my view

I have NEVER had an image shot at high ISO used in an album at anything bigger than a 10x8 - which is a significant reduction in image size and hence any noise hasn't really been noticed

Of course I'd like to shoot in the dark (almost) without any grain/noise and be able to present those images 10ft wide without degradation - but in the real world we are pretty much already there

So if you can only afford a D90 and standard lens then it's likely that you are not a Pro trying to break into the fine art market - in which case your purchase is fit for purpose

'Fit for purchase' really is the key - we are probably all hot-wired to WANT the latest/greatest bit of tech - but if you take a step back and review (seriously) your own needs/output - then you are probably already there - don't waste your money on something you don't really need

Opinion/rant over - discuss if you can be arsed :)

DD
 
yup ! totally agree.
that's why I have super cheap minolta film cameras and some normal lenses and I know that it's just up to me whether I can make a stunning shot from it or not.
 
pchidell said:
Excellent post, thanks! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

No probs :)

Starastin said:
yup ! totally agree.
that's why I have super cheap minolta film cameras and some normal lenses and I know that it's just up to me whether I can make a stunning shot from it or not.
Click to expand...

I ran with my trusty Chinon film cameras & Tamron SP lenses for 20 years before they broke and sold a great many prints from them too :)

Few peeps want more than A3 size and you do NOT NEED 20mp + for this - 6mp is fine if well treated - we are all being conned into needing MORE :bang:

DD
 
Well I agree, and I am a big believer in 'good enough' computing, as well.
 
Whilst I agree in principal - there was one statement posted in another thread by vulcan2912 that made me think that (providing you can justify cost) perhaps there is a place for non pro's to have the best gear....

My last 2 Sigmas never even got used before I re-sold them. I just didn't want to use them. Photography is a hobby for me so I don't see the point in having something that doesn't give me pleasure to use.
 
That's all very well, but misses the point that most photo equipment is not purchased because the buyer needs it, but just wants it. I think it is an excellent practice and if we were all a bit more honest about it we wouldn't feel so guilty :D

It's like the fast/luxury car we all want (that won't get you anywhere any quicker) or the posh Swiss watch (that keeps worse time than a Timex) or the fancy hi-fi that hardly ever gets played anywhere near its potential (and doesn't sound any different even when it is).

But they're all nice things to have, and a pleasure to use. Of course, I haven't got any of those other things, just hypothetically you understand.
 
I agree, I had a D3 because it was the right price. After 8 months I decided that it needed to go as it was too much of a camera for me.
Downgraded to a D300s which is still probably too much but I am happy.
 
david1701 said:
can we add canon to the title please :p
Click to expand...

Yep - even (lowly) Canon gear applies :D

trencheel303 said:
Well I agree, and I am a big believer in 'good enough' computing, as well.
Click to expand...

So true :thumbs:

dinners said:
Whilst I agree in principal - there was one statement posted in another thread by vulcan2912 that made me think that (providing you can justify cost) perhaps there is a place for non pro's to have the best gear....

My last 2 Sigmas never even got used before I re-sold them. I just didn't want to use them. Photography is a hobby for me so I don't see the point in having something that doesn't give me pleasure to use.
Click to expand...

The best gear for your output yes :thumbs: the best gear EVER is rarely needed even by those who buy it

DD
 
Unfortunately it is our human nature that if we believe there is something of better quality than what we have, most of us in the western world, would like to have it. This applies to many things, cars, tv's, computers, houses, just to mention a few. Do any of us really require to watch same the old crap on a larger wide screen than the one we have, probally not, but for many it makes them feel better.
I really don't think this is an issue related just to photography:shake:
 
dinners said:
perhaps there is a place for non pro's to have the best gear....
Click to expand...

Without fuelling the Pro-Am debate, I think that statement is a bit arrogant. Why shouldn't ANY togger use the best gear they can afford and if that is D3s/D3X (I wish) and "Pro" glass (I have!) then so be it. I certainly do not NEED to have my "Pro" glass as all I have is a website and do not sell my work but it is my hobby, I'm very serious about it and I will take to task any "Pro" togger who thinks all I should be using is a kit lens as that is all I need.
 
people just need to be honest to them selves. honest about not actually needing a better kit, just wanting. nothing wrong with that . I myself have bought 2 more film cameras today, just to have the possibility to have different film in each one of them. and they cost so little !! maybe I will win another auction today. after that I'll try to cure my GAS for a while. it's getting out of hand :lol:
 
Totally agree with the sentiment of the OP - it's a view shared by the much maligned Ken Rockwell (despite him owning every camera every made), on the back of his articles, I bought an old ebay special Nikon D40 and for my purposes (printing up to A3) it really is everything I'll ever need - all a photographer needs is a lightproof box with manual controls, everything else is a timesaver and convenience of which the Pro's arguably need to do their job efficiently, but for the hobbyist/amateur it's less of a concern.

I see so much talking and internet space taken up with endless reviews and discussions of gear that I think it creates a whirlpool of desire and diminishing returns, when really the discussion should be more related to the actual art and execution of photography, as I truelly believe the gear that we have today has surpassed all our basic requirements by quite some margin.
 
dinners said:
Whilst I agree in principal - there was one statement posted in another thread by vulcan2912 that made me think that (providing you can justify cost) perhaps there is a place for non pro's to have the best gear....

"My last 2 Sigmas never even got used before I re-sold them. I just didn't want to use them. Photography is a hobby for me so I don't see the point in having something that doesn't give me pleasure to use".
Click to expand...

DonnaM said:
Without fuelling the Pro-Am debate, I think that statement is a bit arrogant. Why shouldn't ANY togger use the best gear they can afford and if that is D3s/D3X (I wish) and "Pro" glass (I have!) then so be it. I certainly do not NEED to have my "Pro" glass as all I have is a website and do not sell my work but it is my hobby, I'm very serious about it and I will take to task any "Pro" togger who thinks all I should be using is a kit lens as that is all I need.
Click to expand...

So you're in agreement then :thinking:
 
Hmmmmm I probably like many buy to a budget, I have many times reached the limit of my most used combination at times (Sigma 100-300 f/4 plus 1.4 tc) which in the Sigma range is their EX(top spec) range and would love some Nikon prime but not just yet. My current kit is what I can afford and is the right kit for me and can produce some excellent results......when the plonker using it gets it right.
 
Completely agree with the original post.

As some others have said it's what you do with the kit not what the kit is that's important.

Maybe I'm just getting old but in the 30+ years I've 'done' photography it seems that these days many more people very quickly say' I've out-grown XYZ starter DSLR and need ABC Super DSLR'. Have they really or do they just want the latest shiniest toy ?
Maybe it's a result of the more rapid turn over of bodies, in 'Ye Olde Days' I can't remember Canon/Nikon/Olympus etc. replacing their main bodies every couple of years.

Having tried out my father in laws 7D I'd love one myself but there are 2 reasons I won't get one.
a) The cost
b) It won't make me a better photographer, yes it may allow me to capture some shots I wouldn't have with my current kit, but it won't make me better as a photographer.

So I'll stick to the 40D I bought from my father in law when he got his 7D, it does everything I need it to do and a lot more.
 
I have some good kit and I have only made $500 at photography. Does the dear make me a better photographer?........ Hell no. Have I had to live on toast and beans to afford it?....................Hell no. Have I enjoyed buying it and looking at it (and sometimes using it)............ Most defiantely. Can I put a price on these things?........... Priceless.

While I do applaud the OP in principle, no I don't NEED L glass, a 7D and a 5D2, I enjoy having it and wanted it, so why not have it? Do I want bigger and better? ........You bet!! But circumstances change and my gear acquisition is at a virtual standstill. Am I happy?............ Damn well over the moon.
 
I produced some amazing A2 prints from my S5pro (6mp interpolated to 12mp). It was the lens that was the weak point.

My daughter is able to match my equine pics using m d60 against me with the D90.

It's not all about the gear once you get up to a certain base level.
 
I'm quite happy with my Canon 20D and old Mac Mini for surfing the web.
 
As a lowly amateur, my photographic NEEDS are around zero. However, my WANTS are mainly to upgrade from Sigma lenses to Nikon ones.
 
DiddyDave said:
No probs :)



I ran with my trusty Chinon film cameras & Tamron SP lenses for 20 years before they broke and sold a great many prints from them too :)

Few peeps want more than A3 size and you do NOT NEED 20mp + for this - 6mp is fine if well treated - we are all being conned into needing MORE :bang:

DD
Click to expand...

I had a Chinon too back in the day.:)
 
Finally, someone with half an ounce of sense :) Gear heads bore/annoy me to death in the amateur world.
 
purpleclouds said:
Finally, someone with half an ounce of sense :) Gear heads bore/annoy me to death in the amateur world.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree...and if you're the individual at Castle Combe on Saturday who asked why I was "only" using the 1D mkIII+400 when he had a mkIV+500 you'll know what my standard answer is. ;)
 
I'm a hobby shooter and have a 5d. I bought a 5dII and sold it within a week. For me, it didn't produce any better pictures. It was obviously better, but when it boils down to it, it wasn't twice as good.

It felt good to sell it and go back to the old faithful.

I like to think I know my equipment and have bought and sold kit over the years. If you buy well (and this means second-hand usually), it can actually help fund your hobby. But like art, you should buy because you want to get use out of something, rather than to sell.

For me, the extreme inconvenience of lugging around a huge bag of kit is only rewarded when the results are stunning. If you produce regular pics, then a good "123 cheese" camera is probably a much more back-friendly option :)

A new lens is always an exciting event. It can re-invigorate a hobby. I also like to think that a fantastic lens invites me to improve as a photographer to justify the expense. It's not for me to judge whether I am successful though.

I like nothing better after coming back from my holidays than looking at the pics I have taken. It takes me back, documents my kids growing up and is a record of my life in the best way possible. I don't think that spending a few quid is out of order for that.

Graham
Graham
 
So your threshold is printing A3...

Let's see some scenarios. Let's condider 400D / D60. If we add good glass (pro zoom, or even a cheap prime), use necessary filters, software, etc, we can easily get a great landscape print. D100 - no thank you, I'd rather try my luck with film.
Can 400D / D60 take a picture of a cyclist winning a race? A football match at night? Not a chance!
Can 400D take wedding dance photos in the darkness? We'd need f/1.4 or 1.2 lens, and probalby a flash. D3s can do that much easier.

Is it all done and discovered? Maybe for uncle Joe, not for me.
 
purpleclouds said:
Finally, someone with half an ounce of sense :) Gear heads bore/annoy me to death in the amateur world.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of Pros who gear-up for little better than the sake of it :shake: A mate of mine bemoans the upgrades Nikon makes as he immediately goes and buys whatever it is when he says he cannot justify the expense - it's :cuckoo:


Arkady said:
Not sure that's quite true...
Click to expand...

Of course it's not true - the earliest digi Pro cameras were no better than those he elludes to, yet I don't seem to remember there being a period where no such shots were taken - people just tried harder than running at a pretend 108,000 ISO :lol:

Just like my D2Xs - the dog's danglies for Weddings when it came out, now it's slagged off as crap as much above 400 ISO and certainly 800 ISO is too grainy hence it's now apparently crap for Weddings ??? :thinking: more :cuckoo:

DD
 
I haven't tried a lot of dslr's but - am I a weirdo to say that I prefer the old look better ? before super duper anti aliasing filters, video, built in hdr's etc, etc :nuts:
 
Starastin said:
I haven't tried a lot of dslr's but - am I a weirdo to say that I prefer the old look better ? before super duper anti aliasing filters, video, built in hdr's etc, etc :nuts:
Click to expand...

Weirdo? Nope :)

Film too developed (pun) and has become less grainy with a wider dynamic range, but there are plenty out there who use the same film they've used for donkeys years - and if they ever discontinue these are the peeps who buy 500 rolls and a new fridge to store them in :D

Newer isn't always 'better' sometimes its just different

DD
 
. . . and there was me thinking 'am I the only one who make the best of what I have got' . . . refreshing. Been there, don that, got the T-shirt, then 6 months ago I had a 'Damascus moment'. Sold all my kit, purchased a D5000, and pulled out the 18-70, not looked back since.

Its an amazing feeling to take pictures, (not that good) that look as good to me as anything I had done before. Its a hobby, I have a life and a more stable bank balance. I know, 'I', have to improve, fancy gear wont make a hapeth of difference.

I also bought a G1/14-45mm at the time for my partner, turns out she is happy with her A640 compact . . . :lol: I'm finding the G1 as good, by my standards, as the D5000, lighter and more compact to, do I sell the 5000, thats tough one, been a Nikon man for 20 years?

Caught myself today, looking at the S/H window of the local 'LCE', spied a couple of lens bargains:banana: . . . but thought, why, I dont sell pics, rarely print pics . . . I dont need more than I have, walked away. However, I suspect its a bit like giving up smoking, never truly loose the urge, "but, you know you are better off with out it" . . . :thumbs:

CJS
 
Last edited:
CJS said:
. . . and there was me thinking 'am I the only one who make the best of what I have got' . . . refreshing. Been there, don that, got the T-shirt, then 6 months ago I had a 'Damascus moment'. Sold all my kit, purchased a D5000, and pulled out the 18-70, not looked back since.

Its an amazing feeling to take pictures, (not that good) that look as good to me as anything I had done before. Its a hobby, I have a life and a more stable bank balance. I know, 'I', have to improve, fancy gear wont make a hapeth of difference.

I also bought a G1/14-45mm at the time for my partner, turns out she is happy with her A640 compact . . . :lol: I'm finding the G1 as good, by my standards, as the D5000, lighter and more compact to, do I sell the 5000, thats tough one, been a Nikon man for 20 years?

Caught myself today, looking at the S/H window of the local 'LCE', spied a couple of lens bargains:banana: . . . but thought, why, I dont sell pics, rarely print pics . . . I dont need more than I have, walked away. However, I suspect its a bit like giving up smoking, never truly loose the urge, "but, you know you are better off with out it" . . . :thumbs:

CJS
Click to expand...

Totally get that :)

Don't get me wrong though, if I fell over £10,000+ and could ONLY find photography as a place for it then I would buy the best there is - only so that I could NEVER blame the gear

But the D5000 is a cracking bit of kit and the 18-70 is far better than its price would suggest :) If you had a D3s and new 24-70mm f2.8 you'd have better IQ and a wider range of shooting options, but as it would be about 5x the weight and twice the size it'd be left at home at times when the D5000 is by your side capturing images :thumbs:

DD
 
daugirdas said:
So your threshold is printing A3...

Let's see some scenarios. Let's condider 400D / D60. If we add good glass (pro zoom, or even a cheap prime), use necessary filters, software, etc, we can easily get a great landscape print. D100 - no thank you, I'd rather try my luck with film.
Can 400D / D60 take a picture of a cyclist winning a race? A football match at night? Not a chance!
Can 400D take wedding dance photos in the darkness? We'd need f/1.4 or 1.2 lens, and probalby a flash. D3s can do that much easier.

Is it all done and discovered? Maybe for uncle Joe, not for me.
Click to expand...

When buying gear on a budget we have to realize there will be situations we can't handle. But rather than worry about this, why not concentrate on what we can do?
 
goldenlight said:
When buying gear on a budget we have to realize there will be situations we can't handle. But rather than worry about this, why not concentrate on what we can do?
Click to expand...

:clap:

Oh and I missed his D100 comment - what crap :bat:

I had a D100 for a couple of years and regularly printed to A3 for competitions - in fact it was the camera that helped me win almost every category at our club, and POTY that year; as well as my prints winning hands down on inter-rival club comps :)

DD
 
DiddyDave said:
Weirdo? Nope :)

Film too developed (pun) and has become less grainy with a wider dynamic range, but there are plenty out there who use the same film they've used for donkeys years - and if they ever discontinue these are the peeps who buy 500 rolls and a new fridge to store them in :D

Newer isn't always 'better' sometimes its just different

DD
Click to expand...

I hope I don't become that 500rolls guy unless I get some good contacts in galleries etc :) .

DiddyDave said:
Totally get that :)

Don't get me wrong though, if I fell over £10,000+ and could ONLY find photography as a place for it then I would buy the best there is - only so that I could NEVER blame the gear

But the D5000 is a cracking bit of kit and the 18-70 is far better than its price would suggest :) If you had a D3s and new 24-70mm f2.8 you'd have better IQ and a wider range of shooting options, but as it would be about 5x the weight and twice the size it'd be left at home at times when the D5000 is by your side capturing images :thumbs:

DD
Click to expand...


I have some very light slr's that I'll start using. Might even sell my dslr to get a scanner.
Just read an article in British tog journal (adore that magazine) about one very good photographer who only shot 15 pics a day in photoshoot, rent the equipment and didn't even know the model of the camera I think as he said that it was 5D but I have a strong suspicion that nobody rent them anymore. Just shows what you actually need. Mind you - the pics he takes are epic :)
Of course this doesn't apply to all sorts of photography

and for me it goes like this - the more I learn about the photography, the less I take pictures, but study the people etc.
 
DiddyDave said:
There are plenty of Pros who gear-up for little better than the sake of it :shake: A mate of mine bemoans the upgrades Nikon makes as he immediately goes and buys whatever it is when he says he cannot justify the expense - it's :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I don't doubt it, but I rarely come into contact with them (a blessing!). I shoot sports alongside guys who still use 1D MKIIs, at night. Noise? Who cares.. it's whats in the picture that sells!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top