How CAN you be a pro..

  • Thread starter Thread starter SimonH
  • Start date Start date
S

SimonH

Guest
.. using crop-sensor cameras?

Now that full-frame digital sensors are comfortably established in the more high-end cameras on the market today, is it really feasible for a pro to hold on to DX format cameras for their pro work? Is it inevitable that we'll begin to see pro photographers arguing that all serious pro photographers are using full-frame bodies? Is that happening already?

If you're a pro photographer using FX format bodies, have you considered, or even started, using this fact as part of your pitch for, say, wedding shoots?
 
Because the actual equipment is only a part of the overall service. And that's ultimately what the couple are paying for.

Let's put it another way. Who/what would you prefer?

Someone like Jerry Ghionis to shoot your wedding with a D5100? Or someone straight out of college with a D4?

As a yardstick it is not a bad one though. For me if I was on a tight budget then I'd consider a 'pro' to be insured but I'd accept them having APS-C cameras...(at least 2!). But if I had a larger budget then I'd expect FF camera bodies with pro glass such as L lenses (as well as insurance).

Lastly, the issue is how do you explain the difference to a B&G who have no understanding of what a crop sensor camera is versus a full frame? I haven't found an easy enough way yet. And if you cannot articulate why they'd want a photographer with a full frame camera then it's hard to justify why they should pay more.
 
Is it a likely scenario, where a student turns up with an FX camera while Jerry Ghionis turns up with a crop-sensor? ;)
 
gadgeteer said:
Lastly, the issue is how do you explain the difference to a B&G who have no understanding of what a crop sensor camera is versus a full frame? I haven't found an easy enough way yet. And if you cannot articulate why they'd want a photographer with a full frame camera then it's hard to justify why they should pay more.
Click to expand...

Certainly this is a stumbler, but possibly showing them examples of DOF from a 35mm lens on each DX and FX might swing it. Perhaps I'd use the comparison between a point and shoot and a DSLR - a more extreme comparison, but it is a sales pitch.. :D
 
Using the basis of your argument, you could argue that you're not a pro until you start using medium format, or bigger.
 
Of course not. Not unless they are taking part in DigitalRev's pro tog/cheap camera video!

But it was just an illustration.

The more serious point is that a couple is paying for the photographer's time he/she is there. Possibly an album, a portion of the kit costs (not just camera but flashes, servers, disks etc) and interpersonal skills. Probably a whole lot more too.

I don't ask my builder if he is sporting a Dewalt drill. I just trust he knows what he is doing.

Already I personally believe that all midrange pro's should sport at least two FX cameras. There's simply no excuses not to nowadays when you can get a D700 for < £1k. As I mentioned, I think that at the budget end of the market, DX is fine as long as it is of D3200 standard or higher.
 
Scarecrow said:
Using the basis of your argument, you could argue that you're not a pro until you start using medium format, or bigger.
Click to expand...

Just so it's understood, it's not my argument, just my discussion point ;)

But I'm pretty sure the medium format argument is well-established in the headshot/fashion field..
 
SimonH said:
Certainly this is a stumbler, but possibly showing them examples of DOF from a 35mm lens on each DX and FX might swing it. Perhaps I'd use the comparison between a point and shoot and a DSLR - a more extreme comparison, but it is a sales pitch.. :D
Click to expand...

Most clients won't care or be able to tell the difference between bokeh from a DX vs FX. Even if you show them side by side, I reckon most would still struggle. I suspect most non-photographers will think "Ooooh background is really blurry. He/she must be a pro"

In that context I'd be interested in how your sales pitch goes. I'd love to be able to use the FF vs crop as a selling point but only if I can do it in such a way that the couple don't think I am some photography snob/geek.
 
gadgeteer said:
In that context I'd be interested in how your sales pitch goes. I'd love to be able to use the FF vs crop as a selling point but only if I can do it in such a way that the couple don't think I am some photography snob/geek.
Click to expand...

Again, just so it's understood.. I'm an amateur photographer shooting DX. I'm not actually planning to pitch any sales in the near future. It's just illustrative discussion. :)
 
Shouldn't this be titled "how can you get work as a pro with a crop sensor".

A pro is someone who earns their living from their photography

A semi - pro is someone who earns part of their living from their photography

They could be using any format they wish but it will always be the quality of their images that gets them repeat bookings, not the camera used to create those images.

Both formats have advantages & disadvantages, neither is right or wrong and a good photographer will take advantage of the benefits of each format out there whilst trying to avoid the disadvantages of that particular format.
 
gadgeteer said:
I suspect most non-photographers will think "Ooooh background is really blurry. He/she must be a pro"
Click to expand...

I agree, and I guess this is largely my point. The ability to throw the background out of focus is perceived to be a pro trait. I think it's probably only pro-level thinking that looks to see if the whole SUBJECT is in focus and tack sharp. But in general with FX, there is more control over the range of DOF.
 
I think unless the client is a hobbyist (or better) photographer, they really won't notice/care if you're FF or crop. The 7D is about the same size as a 5D. Stick a grip on anything and to a punter it looks "pro".

And crop-sensors are currently at a very high level, so with good glass, I don't think you really need FF to go pro at all.
 
So all weddings shot before full frame digital became available must be reshot as they aren't professional enough now?

What a silly topic. Just because something is now more freely available doesn't mean what was used before isn't any good.

My local garage doesn't have the very latest snap on spanners, I guess they aren't qualified enough to work on my car anymore?

A pro can get the job done regardless of the kit they are using. Be it a d300 or D4.
 
How about if you need the extra magnification and depth of field given by a crop format? Sports, wildlife, among others.

Oh, the sensor on my Hasselblad is a crop. Hope my clients don't notice.
 
It's a complete nonsense.

If we take a top pro as being 100% perfect, then the real bottom end pro or part time wannabe as being 10%, the difference between FF and crop sensor would make less than 5% performance difference in the hands of any photographer - it's hardly close to being a deal breaker, whilst there are still so many important differences between photographers.

If I was a customer, my priorities would be:
  1. Price
  2. The quality of the photography
  3. The personality of the photographer
  4. The quality of the presentation products.

I'm not sure how I'd care what gear he was using.

For a commercial photographer, there'd be more knowledge / opinion on behalf of the buyer, but I can't see a crap photographer putting a couple off a great photographer by informing them that he uses inferior gear:cuckoo:.

There's definitely mileage in ensuring they ask their prospective photographer about backups, insurance, etc. which can all be put as positive messages, but how you could describe 'full frame vs crop' to a customer strikes me as too much like 'negative' marketing.

And this is from someone who answers the 'Do I get copyright of the images because Joe Bloggs photography say we would:gag:' on a regular basis.

When your competition are using fake background blur, white vignettes, bad grammar, clickpic websites and no backup gear, what's the real difference between FX and DX?
 
SimonH said:
.. using crop-sensor cameras?

Now that full-frame digital sensors are comfortably established in the more high-end cameras on the market today, is it really feasible for a pro to hold on to DX format cameras for their pro work? Is it inevitable that we'll begin to see pro photographers arguing that all serious pro photographers are using full-frame bodies? Is that happening already?

If you're a pro photographer using FX format bodies, have you considered, or even started, using this fact as part of your pitch for, say, wedding shoots?
Click to expand...

this forum needs to invest in a [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] smiley
 
Or maybe a new section "Talk [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]" :D
 
SimonH said:
.. using crop-sensor cameras?

Now that full-frame digital sensors are comfortably established in the more high-end cameras on the market today, is it really feasible for a pro to hold on to DX format cameras for their pro work? Is it inevitable that we'll begin to see pro photographers arguing that all serious pro photographers are using full-frame bodies? Is that happening already?

If you're a pro photographer using FX format bodies, have you considered, or even started, using this fact as part of your pitch for, say, wedding shoots?
Click to expand...

You're joking right? That reminds me of that television ad about compact cameras, I think Olympus cameras, with George Cole in his role as Arthur Daley and with David Bailey. Arthur seems to be an amateur photographer who was carrying a proper 35mm SLR gear, and even though David is supposed to be a well known professional photographer, he opt for a compact camera and still take great photos.

A camera is just a tool, isn't it supposed to be that if you sell photos, you are a professional photograher and if you don't sell photos, you are an amateur photographer, not your status as a pro or an amateur based on what your camera is, be it a FX or DX, be it a SLR or compact?
 
POAH said:
this forum needs to invest in a [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER] smiley
Click to expand...

desantnik said:
Or maybe a new section "Talk [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]" :D
Click to expand...

Major Eazy said:
You're joking right?
Click to expand...

::sigh::

SimonH said:
Just so it's understood, it's not my argument, just my discussion point ;)
Click to expand...

SimonH said:
Again, just so it's understood.. I'm an amateur photographer shooting DX. I'm not actually planning to pitch any sales in the near future. It's just illustrative discussion. :)
Click to expand...

This is clear, now, right?
 
yes its clear you can't make posts putting what mean across particularly well
 
It's a really silly and very old argument, we had it back in the days of film, when many insisted you had to use a medium format camera to be "professional" when shooting weddings, which was utter tosh, as many "reportage" photographers proved by using 35mm most satisfactorily........
 
Phil V said:
I'm not sure how I'd care what gear he was using.
Click to expand...

Up to a point I'd agree with you but if booking my wedding tog showed me an amazing portfolio then he told me he used a D3000 then alarm bells would ring about whether he is showing me HIS work. If it truly is his work then fair do's and i'd agree that it's not all about the camera. In short I wouldn't write him off but i'd be a lot more suspicious.

Hope that makes sense.

Phil V said:
And this is from someone who answers the 'Do I get copyright of the images because Joe Bloggs photography say we would:gag:' on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

:lol: that one always makes me smile and I hope that my explanation to the couple helps show I know what I am talking about rather than I'm being picky.
 
TCR4x4 said:
So all weddings shot before full frame digital became available must be reshot as they aren't professional enough now?
Click to expand...

Ten years ago when I bought a Nikon D100, a lot of wedding photographers considered it and the Fujifilm S3 to be the ideal wedding cameras (from an article in AP). If you suggested using them now you would be laughed at but they are still as good as they were ten years ago* and most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the results from a ten year old 6MP camera and whatever the standard for weddings is now.

(* except my D100 which is now broken!).


Steve.
 
Major Eazy said:
That reminds me of that television ad about compact cameras, I think Olympus cameras, with George Cole in his role as Arthur Daley and with David Bailey. Arthur seems to be an amateur photographer who was carrying a proper 35mm SLR gear, and even though David is supposed to be a well known professional photographer, he opt for a compact camera and still take great photos.?
Click to expand...

Those adverts are great. George Cole was the professional commenting on David Bailey using an Olympus Trip with comments such as "Well, I suppose it's o.k. for you boys" and "David Bailey?, Who's he?".

The adverts are on Youtube.


Steve.
 
gadgeteer said:
Up to a point I'd agree with you but if booking my wedding tog showed me an amazing portfolio then he told me he used a D3000 then alarm bells would ring about whether he is showing me HIS work. If it truly is his work then fair do's and i'd agree that it's not all about the camera. In short I wouldn't write him off but i'd be a lot more suspicious.

Hope that makes sense.

:lol: that one always makes me smile and I hope that my explanation to the couple helps show I know what I am talking about rather than I'm being picky.
Click to expand...

How would you know what camera he used?

I've seen the website, we've chatted over the phone, I've looked him up on Facebook, and now he's showing me a full wedding, just like he'll deliver mine. I ask some relevant questions and he whips out more sample albums, full wedding sets on his iPad etc. why do I care about the camera? I can see what I'm buying.

If he brought round a random sample of pictures, was cagey about where he shot them and told me he used 'the latest pro cameras' I wouldn't need to know whether it's FX or DX, I'd know it was bullsh17.

There's loads of information more important than camera model, that's what my answer tried to show.
 
Would the average couple know the difference unless they were photographers themselves ?
 
I am a pro photographer with a studio and shoot full frame ,
I photograph weddings and corporate ect .
and its never entered my head to push my work as being better because I use full frame ...
in fact I often switch my d800 to DX crop to get closer when photographing wildlife which
I sell mounted and framed ,
customers are after the end product full or crop.

can you tell by looking at some images what sensor they were taken with ?

ps this is only my opinion
 
So a ff camera and a kit lens or a crop camera and top of the range glass.

Or are we talking like for like lenses?

Crop sensor and good glass, FF and good glass, could anyone tell the difference by looking at the photographs in an album/portfolio/website??
 
Im only a semi pro as I only shoot at weekends for some extra income, which is why I dont use the amature full crop 1.5/1.6 but not a pro so don't use a full frame I stick with the semi pro 1Dmk4's as they are semi crop at 1.3 :)

Is that right?
 
What about settings? We all know that cameras have an A for amateur and P for professional setting but does yours have a semi - P setting?


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
What about settings? We all know that cameras have an A for amateur and P for professional setting but does yours have a semi - P setting?

Steve.
Click to expand...

I have an S on mine. Must be the semi pro mode.

I'm only amateur so stick with A mode!
 
gadgeteer said:
Up to a point I'd agree with you but if booking my wedding tog showed me an amazing portfolio then he told me he used a D3000 then alarm bells would ring about whether he is showing me HIS work.
Click to expand...
A D3000 shooting RAW, through decent quality lenses, and processed by someone that knows what they're doing, has no reason NOT to provide an amazing portfolio.

Skill level isn't linked exclusively with gear. When I upgraded my camera, all that happened was that I filled memory cards faster.
 
Major Eazy said:
You're joking right? That reminds me of that television ad about compact cameras, I think Olympus cameras, with George Cole in his role as Arthur Daley and with David Bailey. Arthur seems to be an amateur photographer who was carrying a proper 35mm SLR gear, and even though David is supposed to be a well known professional photographer, he opt for a compact camera and still take great photos.
Click to expand...

And both were full frame! :gag:

I honestly think the buying public really care about crop or Full frame - they see a DSLR they think pro, they don't know or car about the model numbers. No one has ever mentioned blurry backgounds either as a reason for buying X photographer's work to me.

In fact the only time anyone I've ever spoke to about blur was my mother when I showed her the magnification of my Sigma 70-210 "It's not very crisp is it" She said. (bird in tree at f2.8!) :thumbsdown:

I wouldn't give a flying fig what gear any pro I hired to do a job was carrying, as long as it delivered the goods. :thumbs:
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
I wouldn't give a flying fig what gear any pro I hired to do a job was carrying, as long as it delivered the goods. :thumbs:
Click to expand...


Exactly, look at their portfolio and then use them or not based on that (and how they come across to you)

If they happen to use a compact then so be it, it is the images you are interested in not the equipment.
 
SimonH said:
LOL! I surrender! Honestly, I give up! :)
Click to expand...

Wise move, nobody starts a discussion thread here without expecting to be belittled somewhere along the line :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top