Does your equipment limit you?

ladysue

ladysue

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,222
Name
Sue
Edit My Images
Yes
I am happy most of the time with my Nikon D60 but wonder sometimes if I am going to be seriously hampered in improving my pictures to a standard where I can compete, on a level playing field, in competitions with people who have superior cameras and lenses.I am not thinking of giving up but is it going to be really hard for me? Do you think that your pictures would be improved by a newer , better, lens or camera?
 
Would my pictures be improved? No, it's my imagination and motivation to get out and press the shutter that limit me.

Would shiny new kit improve my motivation? Maybe, it might even excite some short term imagination.. but it's highly unlikely to improve my skills as a photographer.
 
yes, I am limited by the power of my speedlights in the options I have for mains free lighting, which is why I am saving for a set of location lights (and why I carry a 600ws head in a bag to any jobs where I think I might need the power and have mains)
 
Do you think that your pictures would be improved by a newer , better, lens or camera?
Click to expand...

Only in as much as better handling of noise at high ISO's (I've been shooting at ISO 3200 a lot lately) and sharper images at faster apertures, ie I currently stop my F1.8's down a little with an F1.4 or F1.2 I could run F1.8 comfortably.

In an ideal world it would be nice for you to upgrade to a D90 and some faster glass (constant F2.8 maybe?) but we all have to work to our budgets.
It sounds though like you feel your gear is holding you back and sometimes when we hit that point an upgrade can revitalise things for us.
I wish you had a canon, then you could have nicked on of my lenses for a week or so to have a play..
 
In some instances, for example sports togging and macro, kit does have a big bearing. FPS, high ISO and focussing speed all have an impact on the quality of shot acheivable.

Otherwise, I think that by using your imagination and learning to get the best out of your camera and use all of its features then yu can compete. I shoot with a bridge and often think that I am at a disadvantage to some on here, but I am not in a position to upgrade and if I was would only upgrade to a newer bridge, rather than a dslr. I am still learning and feel this is best for me.

This site does have a big focus on kit, and often I think there is a certain pressure to upgrade because of that. I also think that some people spend more time thinkng about the next toy they would like to buy to improve their shots than taking shots, but each to their own.

DO you often post shots for crit?
 
I struggle to get isolation of dogs from the background at agility events so my pictures would be improved with a 70-200 f/2.8 L lens but I can't afford it at the moment so I've either got to make sure I'm always at the right distance to us my 100 macro or pit up with the pictures being not quite as good as I want.
 
Mine would, but only in quality of image.

A D60 does not handle ISO400+ very well.
 
An interesting thread.

My first DSLR was a Nikon D60 and one of my regrets was letting it go and moving on to the D90. Don't get me wrong, the D90 is a great camera and I love it to bits but looking back, I think I got caught up in the must have mindset that most people do have. Its like someone who has a good, fully functioning D300 and gets rid to go buy a D300s. Looking back, rather than fork out for the D90 I wish I had spent that money on a good lens. I firmly believe that the art of photography isnt about the camera its the person behind it and how he/she can manipulate it.

Stick with the D60 and buy good glass instead, Hopefully the lenses will out live the camera so when your D60 bites the dust, you have some good glass to put on your next camera body.

The only drawback with the D60 for me was autofocus lenses but in hindsight I could have manually focused, for me it worth the extra effort for good glass.
 
Yes I beleive there can be a difference, depending on what level of equipment you are on and moving to.
Certainly in the Canon world, I beleive there are three noticeable levels.
Namely entry level bodies and kit lenses, mid range and top of the range bodies and lenses. I beleive in most cases, I can predict what range a picture falls into, before checking the details.
I would love to move to the top end of the market, but until I win the lottery, I need to make do with what I have.:)
 
Quaker said:
Stick with the D60 and buy good glass instead, Hopefully the lenses will out live the camera so when your D60 bites the dust, you have some good glass to put on your next camera body.
Click to expand...

Good idea, but not great advice.

The D60, even when coupled with a 35mm 1.8 or a 70-200mm 2.8 still sucks ass in low light situations.

In low light it hunts for focus, and sometimes can't find anything to focus on, ISO handling is terrible. Fast glass while helping was still limited by the capabilities of the camera.

It's like putting a Porsche engine into a 3 wheeler :)
 
I tire of this 'you must buy bigger, better, faster and newer' thing.

Be honest. Would two more stops of iso, a wider aperture or a faster burst rate really make you a better photographer? Is a slight increase in sharpness or the ability to hand-hold shots in slightly darker conditions really what you are missing? Or perhaps there's other things you could do to focus your attention on if you really want to be better.
 
Xarra said:
Matt: When you're shooting Live Action Roleplay, yes, the better ISO and faster burst rate really will make a difference!
Click to expand...


Suely the answer is to learn to use your camera better? Making more use of available light and better timing would solve the issues you have?
Not wishing to be rude, but becoming a better photographer is about working to the limits of the equipment you have and finding ways to improve with the kit you have. Yes having higher ISO and FPS would make it easier to get the shot you want, but it certainly does not mean that you cannot get it with the kit you have.
 
The Matt said:
Be honest. Would two more stops of iso, a wider aperture or a faster burst rate really make you a better photographer?
Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't make you a better a photographer, but having better equipment gives you a greater ability to take the photos you want. :)

Give £10k of equipment to a noob and you'll still get noob photos!
 
The ISO capability of my body is awful, it doesn't even reach 1600, but I like everything else about the camera too much to get rid. I just have to make do with using flash, longer exposures, tripod or perhaps put my 85mm on and stand back or frame a different viewpoint. So I wouldn't say it limits me as such, just requires me to think a bit harder and compromise. There's always a way. For most of what i do anyway high ISO is not at all important; whenever I am shooting people it's almost always well lit, and urbex photos generally don't need to be done in a rush.
 
Think of it as shooting sport. In the combats you NEED a fast burst rate, and in the dim tents and so on, you need higher ISO. It also doesn't help that you can't ask *** to pose/stop/etc or you ruin it for people!

lawrie29 said:
Suely the answer is to learn to use your camera better? Making more use of available light and better timing would solve the issues you have?
Not wishing to be rude, but becoming a better photographer is about working to the limits of the equipment you have and finding ways to improve with the kit you have. Yes having higher ISO and FPS would make it easier to get the shot you want, but it certainly does not mean that you cannot get it with the kit you have.
Click to expand...
 
I can see what Lawrie's saying about working with the equipment but if its getting to the point where shots are compromised or missed because of not enough high ISO or burst rate, then that is the very definition of being limited by the equipment.

If it was always the person behind the camera who was the limitation, we'd all be using pinhole cameras.
 
I'm mostly limited by the stuff between the ears - I'm nowhere near out performing my kit (yet). The problems I do have are usually lack of knowledge rather than any superior talent being hindered by substandard gear ;-)
 
lawrie29 said:
Suely the answer is to learn to use your camera better? Making more use of available light and better timing would solve the issues you have?
Not wishing to be rude, but becoming a better photographer is about working to the limits of the equipment you have and finding ways to improve with the kit you have. Yes having higher ISO and FPS would make it easier to get the shot you want, but it certainly does not mean that you cannot get it with the kit you have.
Click to expand...

no if you are taking pictures for anything but fun its a requirement to be able to get the shots, making a too slow a shutter speed interesting blurry photo is great (I have a portfolio shot at 1/10) but you need to be able to deliver across the board

Also presentation is important, people will take the man with the big camera/lens more seriously than the man without, my buddy will be assumed to be a pro because he runs a 1series whereas my 5series looks smaller and less 'pro'
 
No, but my wallet does !!

I am going to upgrade to a Nikon D90 because I can then buy the lenses I want without having to pay through the nose for Panasonic jobs that won't give me as good IQ anyway !
 
To quote Scott Kelby

‘ I’ve never seen a field where equipment makes as big a difference as it does in photography’

He does go on to say good photographers will still take good shots with lower end stuff, but as we are not all at the one level, most ‘ should look to buy what the pros use’
 
people always mix up the two sides to this debate... NO better equipment will not make you a better photographer.. YES better equipment will get you better pictures.

Given the way the OP has worded his question then yes.. better equipment will put you on a level playing field with others who have better equipment...


If I take a pic of a plant pot out in the garden on a nice day with a 4k camera and a 200 quid camera your mates will be pushed to see the difference when both printed as a 7x5 or put on here for crit

However in certain circumstances..
No amount of photography knowledge in the world will get you pictures using what you have... As good as they would using the top end gear..
 
KIPAX said:
No amount of photography knowledge in the world will get you pictures using what you have... As good as they would using the top end gear..
Click to expand...

Agreed - the Dude who jumped in the RedBull swimming pool after the Monaco GP wouldn't have achieve his shots with a £200 non-waterproof compact.

I couldn't have taken shots in the (almost) dark of the last few laps of the Korean GP last week with my G1... no matter how well I panned.
 
ladysue said:
but wonder sometimes if I am going to be seriously hampered in improving my pictures to a standard where I can compete, on a level playing field, in competitions with people who have superior cameras and lenses.
Click to expand...

There is proof it can be done. This years BBC Countryfile calendar winner won with a simple P&S; nothing fancy so she was not competing on a 'level playing field' kit wise but clearly her eye for a good shot and taken well compensated for that.
 
sazzle said:
There is proof it can be done. This years BBC Countryfile calendar winner won with a simple P&S; nothing fancy so she was not competing on a 'level playing field' kit wise but clearly her eye for a good shot and taken well compensated for that.
Click to expand...

Its not proof at all.. bring that same camera to my local ice hockey ring where flash isnt allowed and you wont get a single shot worth printing.

Using your proof.... whats the point of a dslr at any price when we could do it with a P&S ... yours is an example of a certain circumstance.. not proof :)
 
Yep - I'm apparently a decent 'tog with my 1000D, but I know that my photos are suffering in certain circumstances as I'm lacking the burst speed, the better focus and better noise handling. In the family photoshoots, the 1000D plus the kit lens work fantastically, but in my outdoor LARP photography, which is basically like shooting sport and a wedding at once (fast moving combat & you can't ask for repeats of the non-combat!) I really do need an upgrade...

Depends what you're doing as to what you need. :)
 
KIPAX said:
Its not proof at all.. bring that same camera to my local ice hockey ring where flash isnt allowed and you wont get a single shot worth printing.

Using your proof.... whats the point of a dslr at any price when we could do it with a P&S ... yours is an example of a certain circumstance.. not proof :)
Click to expand...

Agreed...I could say the same about most football or rugby matches I go to...there's always someone with a P&S who can't get anything decent simply because the kit isn't up to scratch...I know it's a specialised area but both Tony and I make a valid point there.
 
Xarra said:
Depends what you're doing as to what you need. :)
Click to expand...

yup, we pay for options, I have the option of a clean iso 3200, I have the option of f2.8 from 17-200mm over 3 lenses, I have the option of fast primes, off camera flash ect

it means I'm limited (usually) by me not my kit, sure I can run out of power like I said earlier and that does need addressing, but it doesn't happpen often
 
ladysue said:
I am happy most of the time with my Nikon D60 but wonder sometimes if I am going to be seriously hampered in improving my pictures to a standard where I can compete, on a level playing field, in competitions with people who have superior cameras and lenses.I am not thinking of giving up but is it going to be really hard for me? Do you think that your pictures would be improved by a newer , better, lens or camera?
Click to expand...
Sue, I think it's hard for any of us to tell you the route to take. You need to figure out why you aren't getting the results you wish, or what you would like to shoot that you can't. In terms of the photographic process cameras aren't responsible for much of the outcome. Lenses aren't so very different either. By that I mean that the equipment does not....

- Pick the subject;
- Pose the subject
- Pick the background;
- Pick the perspective (where to stand/sit/lay);
- Pick the composition (focal length and direction);
- Pick the lighting (ambient and additional);
- Pick the timing (seasons, weather, time of day, split second);
- Pick the DOF (aperture);
- Pick the motion control (shutter speed);
- Pick the exposure (the above + ISO);
- Control the creative vision for the photograph (all the above).

Those are all down to the photographer, and those are the most significant elements in producing a compelling image. OK, you might let the camera make some of those decisions for you, but not many of them, and if you do let the camera choose, but you don't like the result then whose fault is that? There is always the option to override decisions the camera makes.

Equipment is important too, but in many respects it takes a bit of a back seat to all that other stuff. Better an interesting subject/scene/composition that is technically a little weak than a technically perfect picture of an uninteresting subject and scene.

Sure, better focusing might help if you shoot action. A faster aperture might help if you want narrower DOF, or to shoot in really poor light. Better sensor performance might help if you shoot at high ISO. Certain camera features might allow you to make adjustments more quickly or easily. If you shoot in tough comditions then you may need better build and weather proofing. A better lens might improve IQ. A different focal length range might expand your creative opportunities. I've had a quick squiz at your Flickr and I haven't seen much at all that screams out for new gear. Maybe a little shallower DOF on some, to make the subject pop, but I don't see fast action, dim lighting or subject size/distance being challenges you are unable to meet with your gear. The question which you can answer, but we can't, is - Do you want to shoot that other stuff, but can't because of your gear, or are you not interested in such subjects and situations?

At the end of the day you need to figure out what you want to achieve, artistically, and then figure out whether you can accomplish that vision with the kit you have already. If you can't, then time for new kit. So, what can't you do with the kit you have that you think new kit will fix?

p.s. I've got sh!tloads of gear and I really cannot complain about the tools I have available. Indeed it is pretty hard to think of any more kit that I'd like to have, never mind need (OK, maybe a 300/2.8). But that doesn't mean I get great results. That doesn't mean I have a queue forming to buy my pictures. My results are mostly pretty run of the mill. It's not the equipment that is the issue. It's me. I don't have the eye, the creativity, the inspiration, the vision, the skill, the experience. If I entered competitions I know exactly why I would not win, and it's nothing to do with my gear. It's because my pictures would not stir the soul or the imagination. I'm still learning and I have a long way to go. Buying more gear won't help me with that. Your situation might be the complete opposite.
 
Last edited:
No, but that's because I have the best equipment available at this time.

My skills or lack thereof are the limiting factor.
 
Does your equipment limit you?

No. Absolutely not.
It's not a case of budget for me. I have the cash to invest in a top of the range camera - I just don't want to.
I have very modest kit, but for my needs what I have is more than adequate, and right now my own ability is more of a limitation than the camera. In fact, I get a certain satisfaction out of trying to find the limits of the kit and tease every last ounce of functionality out of it.

I will upgrade when I reach the limit of what I have and my intention is to then get the 450D converted to IR - but for now I'm happy.

Clearly, if I was shooting in certain fields then I'd reach the limits of my kit faster (and in fact, find things that it simply just couldn't do) but for what I use it for it's not an issue - and I don't think that upgrading would make me a better photographer in any way, shape or form.

Sue,
Back to your OP. My personal opinion, based on what you've put up for critique, your 52 and the things that you've been saying you're trying to achieve is that you still have some good mileage in what you have. I don't know much about the Nikon range, but I don't think that anything you're shooting right now should be really pushing the limit of your kit. So IMO, you'd be better off persevering with getting the best out of what you already have.
(Unless of course you're planning on branching out into a new genre like sports or action - you don't actually say what sort of competition you're looking at entering.)

Tim's already summed up what I'm trying to say really well here :

tdodd said:
The question which you can answer, but we can't, is - Do you want to shoot that other stuff, but can't because of your gear, or are you not interested in such subjects and situations?

At the end of the day you need to figure out what you want to achieve, artistically, and then figure out whether you can accomplish that vision with the kit you have already. If you can't, then time for new kit. So, what can't you do with the kit you have that you think new kit will fix?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Do you think that your pictures would be improved by a newer , better, lens or camera?
Click to expand...

Look at some of the most iconic images from the past....

Most were taken with a Rollei with 80mm lens and a dark viewfinder where the images were reversed - or a Leica with a 50mm and a tiny viewfinder - or an early Nikon.

Most had no motor drive so no 9 frames per second - and the Kodak Tri-X (most often) film came in 12 or 36 exposure rolls - which had to be processed some time later!

Far too many people blame their kit as the reason why their work is poor - as they don't want to admit it could just be themselves.... Also, people often buy too much kit at one go, and never really learn what it can do.

Why not go basic - work with one camera, with one fixed length lens and work with just that for a month - you'll find you get better - you learn to move to the right place for that lens - and pretend that each time you press the button it costs £1 - so you take your time....

Now, if you want to photograph cricket, or motorsport, or wildlife then you need long lenses and perhaps high ISO and it will make a difference.... but for most it wont...
 
ladysue said:
I am happy most of the time with my Nikon D60 but wonder sometimes if I am going to be seriously hampered in improving my pictures to a standard where I can compete, on a level playing field, in competitions with people who have superior cameras and lenses.I am not thinking of giving up but is it going to be really hard for me? Do you think that your pictures would be improved by a newer , better, lens or camera?
Click to expand...


Mine haven't as mainly I don't get out that much in order to use it... If I did then i would scroll thru the classifieds or websites like Amazon to buy the gear that I have got now... Which sits in a camera bag 99% of the time...

I've had the Nikon D40, D60, D80, D90, D300s & now have the D700- still my pictures remain the same - the back garden or the parrot :$

I;ve seen some cracking shots taken with the consumer bodies like the Nikon D40... A few have been posted on here in TP

Have a look here Pixel-peeper then you can see some stunning shots taken with what ever camera & lens - be it a comsumer or a pro body & glass..
 
I have noticed a difference in my pictures taken with my new D90. I had the D60 previously. But I have noticed an even bigger improvement as I continue to improve my post processing techniques. I shoot mostly RAW. My biggest problem is transfering what I see to the digital equivelant.:( ( To eagre to press the button without thinking first:bonk:)

I would advise upgrading to the D90, then concentrate on good glass.
 
Not really as my skills aren't good enough for high end camera/lenses - maybe a fast prime to help me with taking pics of my mates who play music in pubs - but not sure I would get anything that would win comps even if I could afford one.
 
there are oddities..

Friday night I shot 12 bouts of boxing and saturday night 11 bouts of MMA cage fights... I have a 35mm f2, a 85mm f1.8 and a 135mm f2 all primes... yet I did both those events with the cheapest lens in my collection that everyone can afford.. the nifty50 that never lets me down and is perfect every time... All on a very expensive canon 1dmkIV but still.. cheap lens :)
 
I've said it before and no doubt I will say it again. The D60 is a bit crap. The combination of metering that tends to over expose, and very limited dynamic range tends to ruin your pictures. Shooting in RAW helps a bit as does D lighting, but I think an upgrade will make you much happier with your results. It suddenly becomes easier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top