Does your equipment limit you?

Go to a site like Photosig and you can browse photos by camera or lens. I see so many good photos taken with entry level equipment. Thats why I don't believe in people like Kelby that think equipment matters so much when they say ‘ should look to buy what the pros use’ . But then Kelby is a photoshopper, he's not really a photog per se.
 
Give a 28 handicap golfer a set of clubs used by Tiger Woods . . . wont make him Tiger Woods . . . same applies to 'togging', read the thread, its 'I want', rarely 'I need' . . . "a poor workman always blames his tools" as my Grandad used to say. Its all about 'craftsmanship', there are no shortcuts to experience . . . :naughty:

Thats fine, go and buy your 'hearts desire' kit, you will certainly get personal satisfaction, might even impress a few people with it? . . . true, things might change, but not necessarily for the better, just different, might even be worse, see the mistakes better, nothing to blame now :| However in 10 years time there may be some improvement to feel proud of . . . :thumbs:

CJS
 
Last edited:
Good pictures are a combination of good composing and timing (etc etc). Newer equipment won't help you here. But newer or better equipment will help bring down the noise or increase the chance of capturing high speed action.

So you should figure out where you would like to improve and work on that.
 
oldnick said:
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.
Click to expand...

Knowing very little about Nikon stuff, especially at the lower end of the range, I thought I'd see what DPReview has to say about the D60. Judging from the conclusions page here....

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond60/page30.asp

I'm not sure the camera is quite the dog you would have us believe. The review seems at odds with your opinion of metering and dynamic range, saying....

- Good dynamic range (better than D40 and slightly better than D40X)
- Very reliable metering and excellent flash exposure

and the list goes on with many other positive remarks.

Looking at the list of Cons the negative points seem for the most part pretty inconsequential.

However, with all that said, in the studio comparisons the Canon 400D seems to my eyes to have a comfortable lead over the D60 in the IQ stakes, whether shooting raw or JPEG. The Canon images look clear, crisp and well defined. The Nikon images look kind of soft and mushy by comparison. Since you probably don't often submit 100% crops to competitions I wonder how significant the differences are in real world results when it comes to printed output. I imagine that some skillful PP would close the gap.
 
Sue, a lot of people have taken the trouble to contribute to your thread, but we have not heard back from you. Have the replies been helpful? Have you had any thoughts about your next steps moving forward? It would be nice to know.
 
Well my camera can't take video which I wouldn't mind trying so in that way you could say it limits me, but on the photo side of things I'm happy with it.
 
I kind of wish it did as that would show me at least some improvement to a significant degree! However, I can look at my photographs now and see that I am getting better than I was when I bought the camera about 15 months ago so I am happy.

I do see how easy it is to believe that you always need better whereas, in most instances, you just 'want' better. It's also a trap that is easy to fall into to think that one is limited by equipment when, really, it's ability doing the limiting as has been said.

I don't take many photo's in low light situations and most of the time it's a sitting target as opposed to one that's moving a lot so that certainly influences my answer I would say!

The camera I had before this was a canon compact, quite old, certainly not an up-to-date model and the thing I have been most jealous of recently is my sister's P&S! :)
 
Seeing the amazing work people are generating on here, from equipment not necessarily costing thousands of pounds, I am reminded all too regularly that the talent is not contained within the body or the lens, and is often standing about 12 inches behind it.

I look forward to the day when I can honestly say that the equipment is the limiting factor in my photography, though I don't expect that to happen anytime soon :)
 
Personally, I think I am limited in some aspects ie resolution of images, ISO and noise management etc. However, I often look at what other people are achieving with the same equipment via a quick search on flickr and it is inspiring. For the jobs I am taking on I would like some semi-pro kit but until I have more jobs under my belt it will have to wait. At this point all of my clients have been happy with the results and no one has questioned what kit i am using!
 
I've owned a D60, a D90 and now a D700.

The D60 was great but I soon realised the limitations.

The D90 blew it away and the pictures I produced tell as much.

Then I soon realised the limitations of the D90 and bought a D700.

The D700 blew it away and the pictures I produced tell as much, although not as much as the difference between the D90 and D60.

Of course, having pro spec glass helps as well. But having started off with a D60 and 55-200mm non-VR and now having the D700 with 24-70, 80-200 and 50 1.4, I'm confident enough to say that the D60, even with any of these lenses attached, wouldn't come close to what I get with the D700.

Remember, the question isn't asking if better kit makes you a better photographer, but some people do outgrow their kit fairly quickly. It all depends what you do and how serious you are about doing it I guess.
 
but some people do outgrow their kit fairly quickly.
Click to expand...

but far, far greater numbers convince themselves that they have outgrown their kit to justify the purchase of some new widget to themselves.

Spend money on light. Best investment you'll make. Far more important than lenses or cameras.
 
Definitely hit the limits of my equipment on Saturday. Was taking some pictures at a local Rugby match and by half time (just after 15:00) I put my camera away as I'd maxed out to ISO1600 on my 400D and the maximum f5 on my sigma 170mm-500mm just wasn't cutting it unless I used a shutter speed which just wasn't freezing the action.

Having said that, it's not very often I go to rugby matches so I can justify £1700+ on a lens to do the job or even around £700 on a body with better ISO capabilities.
 
I can now safely say, NO, I limit my kit at the moment :)

but it's giving me room to expand :)
 
When I was taking pics of my son in a wood a couple of weeks ago, around 430pm, I could really have done with a D700 for the ISO factor, went to 1600ISO and ideally would have liked to have shot at 3200 without too much noise.
 
Thank you all for your replies. Sorry I havent answered them all before.

The reason I asked the question was that I have been taking shots with other togs who had massively superior equipment to mine. I have also joined a camera club where they have regular competitions that I like to enter but a very high standard of entries. Whilst I am sure that I can improve on my photography with the camera I have I keep thinking that, if I am never able to buy decent kit, I will be limited by it. I have noticed that sometimes it wont take a photo, especially in poor light and I have had problems with noise in some shots posted on here lately when I have used higher ISO settings.

I like taking pictures of people, especially street candids and portraits but often they are soft, especially where the subjects are moving ( like cyclists) even if I use 1/200 sec shutter speed ( on my 55-200 lens). I would also like to learn how to do shots like the water droplets and other table top shots and improve indoor portraits. I would need to buy lighting for this but would my D60 and the lenses I have be up to it?When I went along to the Southend TP portrait meet I was aware that my camera and lenses were much cheaper than anyone elses.

I could save up for another camera ( possibly a secondhand D 90) or another lens and wonder which makes more sense.

I know that you can take good photos with a cheaper camera ( I admire Sarah's pictures and always appreciate her help with improving mine) but many of you have expensive cameras and I am always hearing photographers say they need another lens/ body to improve their shots.

For now I will persist with my D60, save for a nifty 50, work on my PP and continue shooting in raw( something I have only just started to do).

Thanks for the comments

Sue
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top