camera or person behind camera?

[sinned79]

Yup, but personally I think for photography, human factor is really important coz two different people cannot take pictures from exactly the same angle. Even the time of the day etc are different.

One may have the best gear but they still need an eye for detail and beauty (may not suit all but should be to most, e.g. fashion designers' works may not suit all but the better ones appeal to most)

u still need the gears for certain specialise shooting (eg macros - a newbie can shoot like a pro using dedicated lens but a pro can shoot like a pro using simple equipments).

so i say both is equally important. a camera cannot shoot by itself without the photog and a photog cannot shoot without a camera.

 

[larrytok]

i believe both play a part.

and yes one photo might look crap to someone , but would look great to someone else.. so well...

 

[plainsunset]

Having a better mouse allows you to have an edge over someone who has the same level of skill as you.

I think no one can dispute this statement.

But the main argument here isn't whether good equipment can assist someone who is already skillful to obtain better results.

The main argument is whether it is the camera or the person that produces a good picture. Which means if i give a complete idiot a very good camera, he will always be able to produce magnificent photos. On the other hand if i were to hand a pro any crap equipment, he can still produce a good photo.

I think any pro when given any equipment will try to maximise the potential of the equipment to produce a good picture. Whereas if you hand someone a good piece of equipment, he can produce pictures with good colour etc, but is it a good photo?

I guess a good photo isn't just able sharpness and colour.

A real comparison will be when we have someone who has a D3 and shoot crap 90% of the time and someone who has a compact camera and produces photos that Wow ppl 90% of the time.

 

[plainsunset]

I give you a 600mm with a 1.5 crop body and ask you to photo some landscape shots near a beach resort vs a noob who has a 12mm and a ff using auto mode, I seriously wonder who will turn out better photo?

Lets remove the luck factor and we can see that people mistake the person behind the camera because in modern time, most people who handles the used to be only professional equipment and blame the camera because they just haven't learn the inside out of how good their equipment actually are and for some, even some of the most basic for handling it and photography knowledge and skills. But for those who learned it, they find restriction in their current equipment. Seriously you don't really have much chance to shoot a high up in the sky bird with your current kit lens at max around 80mm with crop.

Regarding, the good photo with phone, there is a video online about IPhone photo shoot. Maybe his conclusion will be more meaningful about how much touch up he need to do using the software and the restriction to only using certain style for his photoshoot.

Qn is if you are a pro with a 600mm on a 1.5 corp body near a beach resort what would you do? Would you curse your bad luck and walk away? Or would you stand there and try to pick a shot? If i am there with such an equipment i will try to find a shot, walk further down the beach away from the resort. U can still grab a nice landscape shot (provided there is placesi can walk down on the beach). A noob who doesn't know what he is doing might jus look at his 600mm, shrug and walk away.

For such an argument, the only way to determine which determines the quality of photo produced is to do the following experiments:

1) Give 2 photogs ( 1 expert and 1 noob) the same equipment and the same object and ask them to photogragh it.

2) Give 2 photogs of the same skill level different equipment, maybe 1 D3 and 1 PNS and see what they can produce.

This argument will never be solved because the abv 2 experiments have the following problems.

1) How do we determine skill level? I think no one can do so for certain.

2) How do we determine a good photo? What works for you dun work for me.

For me the human element is more important because a real photog will try his best to make the most out of any situation to make the best photo no matter how crap the situation or equipment he has while a noob will merely take his camera and keep snapping hoping to somehow get a good shot.

 

[nathaniel]

Supposing i needed actual day photography for my wedding - i would pay a pro with an entry level DSLR + kit lens. I wouldn't hire a newbie with a full frame DSLR plus 10-20 expensive lenses in his bag.

 

[wootsk]

What I just means is that it takes 2 hands to clap. While it isn't really right or a good way, there isn't really any problem if the newbie uses a auto mode and spam his shutter away getting some lucky good shots. If he can afford lots of memory and a really good camera and lens, why not? There is a limitation to a noob where even if he looks into a viewfinder, he can judge what he sees inside. Perhaps they might even be better if they can place some creative idea that came into their mind into the photo before looking into the viewfinder. (Getting an idea of the image, framing and result before shooting) I have seem advance user who are so following the composure rule and rule of third that they actually have NO idea of what they are shooting and frame the subject left or right in the viewfinder.

 

[wootsk]

I think this is getting off as there isn't a clear definition of the user or the camera. Some takes the user as a pure idiot who cannot see the difference between a good or bad photo. While my definition of a good camera depends purely on who's the user, people presume good camera must be stuff like D3X and others. If the user isn't experience in even handling a DSLR, using a Sony A900 or a Pentax K7 will be much easier. You ever heard people who shoot landscape and portrait telling others who good their camera FPS are and others should get it??? -_-" If you are rich go ahead if you think you might need it...

 

[wootsk]

I agree it's the photographer. All please pass your lens, camera and any other equipments to me in exchange for great PNS camera. Thank you, this thread is so tiring...

 

[AndreaFabyan]

i took a good photos with my 450 d and tamron lense.... but honestly my pics are not sharp and not good enough and without postpro the color not vibrant enough .... thats why i wanna bought 7d with 85mm , 1.4F lens..... i can take more beautifull and perfect photos......
give 5dmark2 with with a good lense to a noob who want to learn photography ... and wait for 2 years..... u can see them improves day by the day and producing a good pics....

 

[ReiszRie]

logically speaking, one with basic photography skills, a mere 6 months of photography experience and gear we would drool over has a much better chance of grabbing good shots than a 20 year photography veteren with a $199 point and shoot thats the simply truth... composition merely completes a photo by making it outstanding instead of good, i'd think that in a blind test, the majority of CSers here would pick the shots taken by an amateur with amazing gear than a well composed shot by a veteren with $199 point and shoot

Personally, photography is more of a technical skill since you can't truly create something out of nothing but your sheer imagination and like fishing, you need to be in the right place at the right time with the right gear...

since skill is highly debatable and difficult to prove, thus many claims to possess it with attractive works and defends it with great fervor even though they probably obtained said "skillful" masterpieces with their gears being unsung heroes...

reason why no pro photographer covers a fashion show in milan equipped with nothing but an iphone 4.

 

[ReiszRie]

sorry for the various typo, bad sentence structure and grammar, typed this OTG on my iphone. xD

 

[bayusuputra]

it is the photograph that matters the most..

 

[oLYNXo]

I feel that the person matters. Even shots by SLRs can be better than shots be DSLRs

 

[jOhO]

maybe can think about it this way...

two scenarios:

(a) same photographer with two different cameras (one "good" and one "bad")

(B) two different photographers (again one "good" and one "bad) with the same camera

the difference in quality of the images will be far greater in scenario b, hence person behind camera is more significant than the camera itself.

 

[jlim76]

I will forego the landscape and go for some bikini babes with the 600mm kekeke

 

[ReiszRie]

maybe can think about it this way...

two scenarios:

(a) same photographer with two different cameras (one "good" and one "bad")

(B) two different photographers (again one "good" and one "bad) with the same camera

the difference in quality of the images will be far greater in scenario b, hence person behind camera is more significant than the camera itself.

The variable here is how good and how bad, you need someone who is really bad and one who is really good to see a discernable difference in skill.

 

[jOhO]

The variable here is how good and how bad, you need someone who is really bad and one who is really good to see a discernable difference in skill.

isn't that the same with equipment? probably even harder to tell a difference in the cameras, what with all the post processing going on after the shot.

 

[Rocky78]

IMHO, I believe BOTH play a part in a successful photograph.

The photographer 80% and the camera 20%.

 

[digitalpimp]

IMHO, I believe BOTH play a part in a successful photograph.

The photographer 80% and the camera 20%.

+1 for this.

 

[nathaniel]

Where does photographer count more?
1. go into any wedding photography studio--do make your decision by looking at their gear or their albums?

2. go into any pro photographer's website--does he/she highlight his portfolio or his gear?

3. if I'm trying to get a job as a photographer with some organization (eg a news agency), do they look at my portfolio or my gear?

4. Alternative photography where only a basic setup is required: shooting film, black & whites, lomography, pinhole.

So where does gear count more?
1. Maybe astrophotography?
2. Extreme sports, where fast lens, high frames per second, autofocus tracking is impt.

*But if the person is really a beginner, person may not even succeed in figuring out how to take (1) and (2).