destiny_star said:
He never mention he owns a Leica, and Leica is not the only German made camera.
can be a Praktica camera also
Hobby - Photography: Only for those with $$$?
- Thread starter kevyan
- Start date
- Status
He never mention he owns a Leica, and Leica is not the only German made camera.
can be a Praktica camera also
destiny_star
Senior Member
catchlights said:
i was refering to Belle&Sebestian quote in response to joe's post. i din say it was either.. i was juz clarifying.. any misunderstanding somewhere???
There are much more hobby that are way more expensive than photography.
Take for example, browse through audiophile forums in Singapore, and you can find many people asking around for recommended hifi setups, with a budget of SGD15k and above! :bigeyes: And believe it or not, that is just the tip of the iceberg.
Take for example, browse through audiophile forums in Singapore, and you can find many people asking around for recommended hifi setups, with a budget of SGD15k and above! :bigeyes: And believe it or not, that is just the tip of the iceberg.
Misunderstood that you presume Joe own a Leica.destiny_star said:
politicalartist
New Member
ortega said:
award winning does not mean that you are good.It just means your photos pleased the judges and it suited the theme.
My votes were "Yes" & "No".
Yes, to a certain extent because to do a wide variety of photography (e.g. macro), u do need to spend some (quite alot, in fact) money to buy different accessories...
No because anyone can do it. What comes out depends on the "photographer's" eye for detail & art...
Yes, to a certain extent because to do a wide variety of photography (e.g. macro), u do need to spend some (quite alot, in fact) money to buy different accessories...
No because anyone can do it. What comes out depends on the "photographer's" eye for detail & art...
wrx_sti_22b
Senior Member
If u talking abt hobbies that are expensive, there are others also & more useless. Like R/C cars for e.g. Especially those on gas one, 1 small engine block maybe abt $600+. Then the chassis set up etc. Like miniature cars with the very latest in material & efficiency design (ball bearings, carbon fibre, titanium etc). Even if it's not a gas car, but battery powered, the rechargeable battery packs & their very modern chargers are also more expensive than camera's.
I started taking photos only when i had my first owned camera, a Canon APS IXUS. That is in the late 90s. Then my first digicam is a 1.3mp Sony one around Y2K. I upgraded slowly selling off the present & buying the nxt. So from a 1.3mp, to a 2.0mp, to a 3.2mp, to a 4.0mp, to a 4.0mp mega zoom, to a 5.0mp mega zoom & then my present entry level dSLR...
I started taking photos only when i had my first owned camera, a Canon APS IXUS. That is in the late 90s. Then my first digicam is a 1.3mp Sony one around Y2K. I upgraded slowly selling off the present & buying the nxt. So from a 1.3mp, to a 2.0mp, to a 3.2mp, to a 4.0mp, to a 4.0mp mega zoom, to a 5.0mp mega zoom & then my present entry level dSLR...
Paul_Yeo said:
Agree, hobby is meant for enjoyment.
ortega
Moderator
politicalartist said:
by world class photographers competing on a world stage against other world class photographers.
so it shows that the pictures captured by the Prosumer camera is good enough.
I was not talking about the photographer but just to show that you can also use prosumer cameras to take good pictures.
Belle&Sebastain
Senior Member
destiny_star said:
lighten up guys, its meant as a joke, i intentional misspell it
destiny_star
Senior Member
Belle&Sebastain said:lighten up guys, its meant as a joke, i intentional misspell it
nah.... no prob guys.. not a big deal..
sometimes we do tend to mis-read some words.. ;p
FiveIronFrenzy
New Member
No. I started photography back when I was getting $2 a day for lunch.
Save money to buy film, shoot the roll, save money to develope and print.
Save money to buy film, shoot the roll, save money to develope and print.
destiny_star
Senior Member
FiveIronFrenzy said:
same here.. i started young too.. but since no $$ to develop fotos so i had to stop shooting for many yrs till i got into NS, then started shooting again... :sweat:
i ever came across a camera shop that gave me a word of wisdom when my friend tried to bargain
friend: "uncle, i no money liao leh.. pocket just burned a hole from buy XX (camera product)"
uncle: "friend, when you have no money, you won't think of walking into a camera shop in the first place"
He gave a fact and down to earth comment. Followed by a lesson on feeding families and how to spend money..
friend: "uncle, i no money liao leh.. pocket just burned a hole from buy XX (camera product)"
uncle: "friend, when you have no money, you won't think of walking into a camera shop in the first place"
He gave a fact and down to earth comment. Followed by a lesson on feeding families and how to spend money..
StealthEagle
New Member
yanyewkay said:
Quite true, if you can't even feed yourself or your families, then buying an expensive camera is quite useless.
Anyway, from my point of view...yes and no to the qn. Yes is that those with some money can get a cheap film camera to begin the journey of photography, otherwise the person has to loan from others(whether they want to do it, that is another question).
No is because photography is about the mind, eye, skills and how creative you are. Carrying SLR doesn't make you smell like a pro when you have 'crappy' shots.
- Status
