Gear snobbery

petemc said:
He said doesn't mean you can make a masterpiece. He didn't mean that you don't need expensive gear. A good photographer will be able to take a good photo with any camera.
Click to expand...


Exactly-so its a mute point imho.

Nothing to do with snobbery- a point and shoot doesnt cut it in the world of great photography-so thats why people buy the best.

Circles rings a bell here-so before this gets into a arguement-seya.:bonk::lol::)
 
Um, a great photographer will be able to take a great photo with a point and shoot. So a P&S can cut it in the world of great photography. Its been proven many times. Why do pro's use expensive gear? Because it does the job they need it to.
 
Ajophotog said:
Haha that's one of the most PC anwsers I think I've seen on here ;)
Click to expand...

Ha Ha. Obviously you're an ugly and smelly girl. Which is the reason why you wear make up and perfume.

:razz:
 
digitalmaniac said:
Exactly-so its a mute point imho.

Nothing to do with snobbery- a point and shoot doesnt cut it in the world of great photography-so thats why people buy the best.
Click to expand...

Lord Snowdon said it's not what gear you use but when you press the button. He knows a lot about photography at the highest levels. A P&S can outperform a DSLR. I reckon that Andreas Gursky with a P&S would produce better images than most of us with the equipment of our dreams.
 
rh1944 said:
Lord Snowdon said it's not what gear you use but when you press the button. He knows a lot about photography at the highest levels. A P&S can outperform a DSLR. I reckon that Andreas Gursky with a P&S would produce better images than most of us with the equipment of our dreams.
Click to expand...


Even Snowdon, or Cartier-Bresson or Capa, would struggle with a p+s up in the gods at the olympics, so gear does matter to a certain extent.
 
Im not really snobby when it comes to other peoples cameras but i do get irritated when you see people with top of the range cameras and really expensive lenses shooting on auto i just want to yell buy a book to go with it;)
 
Toothie said:
Im not really snobby when it comes to other peoples cameras but i do get irritated when you see people with top of the range cameras and really expensive lenses shooting on auto i just want to yell buy a book to go with it;)
Click to expand...

Assuming these people are amateurs then, as long as they are enjoying themselves, does it matter how they achieve their results?

My car will do 0-60 in 9 seconds but I'm happy to take 12 on most occasions....it's the same thing isn't it?

Bob

PS...I shoot manual 90% of the time so I'm not being defensive here.;)
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Even Snowdon, or Cartier-Bresson or Capa, would struggle with a p+s up in the gods at the olympics, so gear does matter to a certain extent.
Click to expand...

Precisely. I think circumstance will occasionally dictate.
Using your skill, creative vision and ability, combined with choice of equipment and being adequatley equipt for the circumstance will produce results.
 
rh1944 said:
I reckon that Andreas Gursky with a P&S would produce better images than most of us with the equipment of our dreams.
Click to expand...

What about Andreas Gursky with a P&S but no access to any post-processing?

I reckon he'd go off and cry.

That Britain in Pictures programme from a year or so ago was quite interesting with the professional snappers having to use the camera they were given - down to and including a Kodak EasyShare (IIRC).

Some matched their normal standard because they realised they'd have to work with the camera they had but I remember a couple who just moaned and moaned that their £100 compact wasn't quite up there with their 25k 'blad.
 
When I shot with a Box Brownie (yes, I am that old) I knew a SLR would make me a better tog. :bonk:

When I had a p+s I looked on with envy. If I had a DSLR surely I'd take fantastic pic's. Fit to grace any wall. :love:

I have my DSLR, I still take c**p photo's and I still look on in envy at the pro gear. I'll never learn :bang: :bang: :lol: :lol: Perhaps I should admit defeat and consign my cam to the loft.

I'll never do that though cos this is my hobby has been for many years. The 15k+ pics on the HD and almost as many prints in boxes are testament to that.

Sorry way off topic. In answer to the OP, no I'm not a camera snob. :)

Di
 
richmond said:
When I shot with a Box Brownie (yes, I am that old) I knew a SLR would make me a better tog. :bonk:

When I had a p+s I looked on with envy. If I had a DSLR surely I'd take fantastic pic's. Fit to grace any wall. :love:

I have my DSLR, I still take c**p photo's and I still look on in envy at the pro gear. I'll never learn :bang: :bang: :lol: :lol: Perhaps I should admit defeat and consign my cam to the loft.

I'll never do that though cos this is my hobby has been for many years. The 15k+ pics on the HD and almost as many prints in boxes are testament to that.

Sorry way off topic. In answer to the OP, no I'm not a camera snob. :)

Di
Click to expand...


Look at the bright side, you got to play with the box brownie, a P+S and DSLR. :D
 
gingerjon said:
What about Andreas Gursky with a P&S but no access to any post-processing?

I reckon he'd go off and cry.

That Britain in Pictures programme from a year or so ago was quite interesting with the professional snappers having to use the camera they were given - down to and including a Kodak EasyShare (IIRC).

Some matched their normal standard because they realised they'd have to work with the camera they had but I remember a couple who just moaned and moaned that their £100 compact wasn't quite up there with their 25k 'blad.
Click to expand...

I didn't see all the Britain in Pictures programmes, but I do remember some of the results were excellent. I'm not sure what your conclusion is on this matter. Must people use DSLRs to produce great pictures?
 
rh1944 said:
I didn't see all the Britain in Pictures programmes, but I do remember some of the results were excellent. I'm not sure what your conclusion is on this matter. Must people use DSLRs to produce great pictures?
Click to expand...

Sorry - should have given examples.

The problem one in particular faced was with shutter-lag and she couldn't seem to get her head around that and so kept taking pictures that didn't anticipate the situation ... and another had major problems with the RAW write time. In both cases to take the kind of pictures they normally took they were right to require the more expensive gear ... but if they'd worked within the limitations of the camera (i.e. shutter lag means click earlier, slow RAW means take jpegs) they'd probably have been okay.

I think they all came back with pics they were happy with in the end.

So, a long-winded: no you don't need the best gear to take the best pics but it'll help.

Which is possibly a bit obvious.
 
It's not the length that matters, it's how you use it. (I was talking about lens!)
I am the proud owner of a Nikon D40 (okay, so it's not the most top of the range camera that could go off and make you a cup of tea if you ask for it) which I love to bits and it does the job but I have to admit that my most memorable shots has been taken with my humble Fuji A900!
I show off my results more than my gear themselves . . . after all, isn't that the whole point of photography?
 
gingerjon said:
Sorry - should have given examples.

The problem one in particular faced was with shutter-lag and she couldn't seem to get her head around that and so kept taking pictures that didn't anticipate the situation ... and another had major problems with the RAW write time. In both cases to take the kind of pictures they normally took they were right to require the more expensive gear ... but if they'd worked within the limitations of the camera (i.e. shutter lag means click earlier, slow RAW means take jpegs) they'd probably have been okay.

I think they all came back with pics they were happy with in the end.

So, a long-winded: no you don't need the best gear to take the best pics but it'll help.

Which is possibly a bit obvious.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you. You are going to give yourself more chance to succeed with better equipment. On the down side, it is likely to take you longer to get to a group of settings that work for you. Once you are comfortable then things will happen.
 
Werecow said:
I'm the pretty much the opposite. I often feel embarrassed to take out any expensive gear in front of other photographers and often wish i could get by on something smaller and cheaper.
Click to expand...

I can really relate to that - especially with people I know. A mate of mine wanted to get his wife something a bit better than her PaS so asked what I was using. I caught up with him last week, only for him to make some smutty comment about the cost of it all :lol:
 
rh1944 said:
I would agree with you. You are going to give yourself more chance to succeed with better equipment. On the down side, it is likely to take you longer to get to a group of settings that work for you. Once you are comfortable then things will happen.
Click to expand...

I was opposite when I bought the D3. Almost overnight, I felt more at home, it was easier to operate, all the functions were on easy to push buttons on the body, no need for menu's etc.

And it was amazing, the first photo I took with it was EDI Skyline on a bright overcast day. Hit the shutter, and whilst I "felt" the whites would be blown to hell as on they would have been with ME using the D200, the photo was perfectly exposed I felt. That was new to me.

Since getting it, I absolutely cannot stand using my D200, it seems to take a very harsh contrasty image in comparison, very strong whites, dark reds and blacks, and just feels wrong now.

I hope that doesnt come across as snobbish, its just a comparison between my old and new camera, and how I feel having better gear has helped me get better photos.

Gary.
 
I tend to be the opposite. I try to be discreet with my gear. I dont want to be seen as the flash git.
I'm lucky I suppose because I like nice cars/equipment and can normally afford to buy them, but it doesn't change the person. I am naturally a fairly introvert person and just like to keep myself to myself at times.
It may sound stupid, but I tend to use my 70-200mm with a 1.7 conv if there are plenty of people about when I'm shooting Aircraft, rather than my 200-400mm because the attention i got when using it at Waddington was unreal.
Not something I expected.
As far as snobery goes, I just don't like snobs of any kind. We are what we are. Be happy with it. I was happy to lend a lad new to photography my 70-200mm at Coningsby a few months ago. He was over the moon to have the chance. Got some cracking shots too!
If I meet any of you at a meet sometime, your welcome to use the 200-400mm if I'm not using it. Just don't drop it please! Its all about enjoying.....


Kev.
 
busterboy said:
Yeah but the difference betwen mine and yours is mine have lenses in.;)
Click to expand...

You should take them out then. Take some photos n things.

Flash In The Pan said:
Even Snowdon, or Cartier-Bresson or Capa, would struggle with a p+s up in the gods at the olympics, so gear does matter to a certain extent.
Click to expand...

No-ones saying that gear doesn't matter. People are saying that, and I think i've said this, that a good photographer will be able to get a good photo from a p&s. Of course you're not going to find a guy with a mobile phone camera at the finish line of the 100m hoping to get a brilliant panning shot. He would know his limitations and get a different photo. Whats the difference between a p&s and a dslr when photographing a landscape? DSLR will be sharper, maybe a wider lens but basically as long as both have manual controls you'll be able to get a good photo. If its just fully auto you can still play.
 
I have a Sony W300 P&S. It has a 13.6 megapixel image and you can buy a 0.7x converter and a 2.6x converter. There is a manual setting which is the equivalent (but with a more limited range) of the AV setting on the 400D. I rather like some of the images I have got from this camera of late.
 
Whats annoying is when your mates come with their cameras and are like your photos are amazing but i guess with that camera it just makes anything amazing really. AHHHH No it doesn't, so i always tell my friends if they learn how to use their cameras properly and get a basic knowlage of photography they can take photos like mine. Moral of the story is, it's not whos got the 1d MkIII it's who can actually use their gear.
 
Canon Bob said:
Assuming these people are amateurs then, as long as they are enjoying themselves, does it matter how they achieve their results?

My car will do 0-60 in 9 seconds but I'm happy to take 12 on most occasions....it's the same thing isn't it?

Bob

PS...I shoot manual 90% of the time so I'm not being defensive here.;)
Click to expand...

not at all Bob its jealously on my part im aware of this :D
 
It's all about control.

How much control
What you can control
The limitation of the control

Better gear gives you more scope in your photography, it is true that a good photographer can take a good shot from a P&S, that's because he knows the limitation of the camera and doesn't go beyond it and use what is good in that camera to get the shot he wants.
 
P&S has it's place as does a 1Ds or a hasselblad.

It depends on the result you want to achieve. I agree that a P&S in the hands of a good creative photographer is capable of producing good results. No question.

But, if you want top performance autofocus try a 1d. I've got a 5D and I really do love it, for shooting portraits it's great. But it simply won't photograph fast moving objects. Fine if it's moving left to right but if it's coming towards you at all, forget it, it just won't keep up. The 1Ds does though and the 1d MkIII with 10fps is the tool of choice for (Canon) sports togs for a blooming good reason. It gets the shot that they need for that back page pic.

Equally if you want to shoot an advertising campaign where the images will be blown up on the side of a building you might actually need to look to a Hasselblad to get the resolution to go that big.

It's horses for courses. Good gear does not make a good photographer but it does allow an average one like me to get shots that I would otherwise not be able to get.

A very good example of gear not making the tog is our very own monthly competition. Does the current leader have a Hasselblad? Nope a 450D :)
 
Gear snob? I like good gear, yes. Does that make me a snob? No.

Even I admit some of my best shots were with my D50 and a cheap Tamron 70-300mm lens, or on a 4MP Kodak Easyshare...



It's where and how you point it, not what you point with!
 
^^^ I agree, I love taking good picture with my Prosumer and it does sometimes make me question why I lug all that heavy gear around when the bridge will suffice. Snob, me? No way...... well maybe a little :lol:
 
I must admit I got a bit embarressed a while back when I was at the Nurburgring taking some photos on one of the secluded, harder to reach corners when a proper pro guy turned up with a D300 and a massive lens and felt like a bit of a prat!

But after seeing his kit I now really badly want a D300 and a huge lens.
 
I love seeing other people with all the pro gear, 2 cameras and all that, it makes me want to get to that stage in my photography where I can make full use of all that gear. With my gear however, I like to make the most out of what I got and doesn't really bother me that its not the best out there. Great photography can be achieved I feel with basic camera kits (e.g D40 18-55 kit lens) and I like using my non-pro gear to get the best out of it I can.
 
James Rothwell said:
.... when a proper pro guy turned up with a D300 and a massive lens and felt like a bit of a prat!
Click to expand...

I have a D300 and a big pro-lens, and I love turning up and standing next to people with entry level DSLRs and lenses. Makes them feel a bit of a prat, apparently ;)
 
Next time i go to Busterboys i`m going to tell mrs Walt to take her biggest handbag with her if you know what i mean!!!!!!!!! ;););):lol:
 
There is a LOT of snobbery. Particularly with lenses.

A lot of folks like to think that they Canon / Nikon lens are better than 3rd party lenses, but often they are not.

I think many people run a sort of "mental - USM" on their own brand images which sharpens them up when they see the Canon or Nikon logo :)
 
I don't brag about my kit when standing next to someone with a point and shoot.
If a pro stood next to me I would probably ask him/her about certain things as their knowledge would be something I could probably learn from.
I've had a few people with point and shoot cameras ask me about my kit and I explain to them that I am quite new to DSLR photography but I am getting to grips with the basics.
If someone is taking the same picture as me with a point and shoot and they are using it in fully auto mode, I try to point them in the direction of a setting that should produce a better picture and they are quite often pleased with the result when comparing them with the auto shot they took.
I enjoy taking advice from people who are more experienced and if I can pass on some useful tips, I enjoy helping someone to use their kit to produce better quality pics.
 
I don't like being judged my gear.
Some people see big camera and automatically think PRO.
They haven't even seen my pics....!

but its not so bad nowadays since its a lot more common to see people with big cameras walking around and get the "My friends got one too" comment! WOO :D lol
 
A while ago on breakfast telly Chris Simpson (I think) was interviewed and at the end was asked if he worried about getting his gear nicked. No he wasn't, cos he uses a Linhof, and nobody would want that ;-)

We're all buyers of optical bling. New buyers are often told they need certain brands because of their greater suitability for shooting sports or our feathered friends but (despite the technical achievement) you have to ask what the point is of yet another shot of a car or bike taking a bend. Suggestion: watch the film Dark Blue World for ideas about men interacting with machines and the environment.

And to the new buyers: find your niche. You may have to try out all sorts of gear to get there, but may finish up really needing only a couple of lenses. Don't think you need super long lenses to act the part; on the other hand, don't deny yourself the experience if it's within your grasp. Your unique contribution to photography is most likely to be the shots of your family, friends, pets, locality, travels and activities, for which you won't need a huge amount of bling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top