Hobby - Photography: Only for those with $$$?

[Simon_84]

How about the F200EXR? Smaller and cheaper then an LX3

the starting aperture of f3.5 is a disappointment as their previous models like the f30/31 fd has a starting aperture of f2.8.
lack of manual controls is also a turn-off...f200 is more like a p&s with good iso performance.

 

[eyes]

Hobbies starts around 200 bucks I guess.

I had a great time at Wild Wild Wet a few weeks ago and this is how the place looks like before I left.

This image is taken with:

ps. If someone would sponsor me a model shoot with this camera, I'll post some of those pictures here. And if anyone wants to buy this gem from me at RRP, I'll sell this and show the buyer some tricks with it.

 

[smile_gerard]

the starting aperture of f3.5 is a disappointment as their previous models like the f30/31 fd has a starting aperture of f2.8.
lack of manual controls is also a turn-off...f200 is more like a p&s with good iso performance.

Or wait for the olympus pen

 

[wootsk]

"eyes", thought ur post should belongs to the B&S forum

 

[lsisaxon]

Or wait for the olympus pen

Isn't it already selling?

 

[sheltie_prince]

Hmm.... Photography is nt really expensive hobby in my opinion. It's the perception of various individuals that sees it as such.

To some, using a PnS, they may enjoy just taking photos of his/her life story and be contented with capturing those moments. They may not necessary expect a breath-taking photo standard or quality.
To others, it may be the pursuit for a perfect picture of a scene or a perspective that the photographer is after.

It's hell lot cheaper than my watch hobby and golf where with these hobbies, and many other hobbies mentioned in this thread, cost loads more.

With photography, I feel the 'cost' of the hobby is defined by the expectation of the photographer's picture expectation.

For me, NO. Photography in this digital age, are NOT only for those with $$$$

 

[ed9119]

you want to do photography you need a camera..... even a disposable camera.... that costs $$$

but that $$$ might mean peanuts to you but serious $$$ for someone else

its still $$$

So sad truth of the matter is (all things being equal meaning nobody financing you with free camera donation) Yes, Photography is only for those with $$$ that is not needed to stay alive , have a roof over the head and feed the family

But that does not make us bad or snobbish people.... just people who are willing to save-up or plunk down $$$ to make it happen with whatever we can afford

Sorry, did not go through last 4 years of pages in this thread to see if someone else has made similar comments.

p/s if by '$$$' TS meant RICH.... then of course no.... with a very modest $ outlay, photography is within the reach of most people's disposable income

 

[olla86]

Photography is hobby for the ordinary people too! For people who have the taste, the feeling of nature and inner potential!:thumbsup:

 

[Youhong]

No one says photography = must use PROFESSIONAL cameras... :nono:

Photography IS the process of capturing images, and NOT about the products.

There are toy cameras below $100 to even DIY pinhole cameras to play with... :lovegrin: And/or to go round borrowing other people's cameras/toys to use...

 

[Snoweagle]

Though an expensive investment too, satisfaction is what's most impt. For me i poor man so cannot buy too expensive equipment.

 

[papaho]

I think photography is more like a reasonably cheap hobby that has a higher potential of turning expensive to maintain. But satifactory results can still be attain from simple equipments..


even hobbies like cycling, tennis can also turn extremely expensive if the hobbyist decicdes to use the best equipments , wear the best gear for the activites..

Just that photography provides more avenues for spending..

 

[cabbySHE]

Most people I'd spoken to...all will say,

The moment you open your eyes, it cost money. Excluding the word " photography ".

I would like to add...even we close our eyes also cost money. Especially for those who sleeps with air-con or fans on. Simply bcoz we all live in a world that needs money to survive.

The question is irrelevant to the actual context.

 

[forward]

I believe thread starter is beginning to face and
tackle the many financial challenges ahead of him.

But once he realises that every moment of his life
is infinitely creative and that the world is endlessly
bountiful, all he has to do is to have a clear and
profound desire.

Everything in his heart desires will surely come true.
So the three hundred over people who feel the same
way voting that photography is expensive would have
missed out the fact that every human being holds the
power to create whatever he or she desires.

Once you are able to manifest the changes your
desire will depend on the depth and passion of your
belief system. Your attention to your desire will
stay focus.

Sad to say most of us are not able to do passionately
all the desire we want in our own life.
-------------------------------------------------------
"By believing passionately in something that still
does not exist, we create it.
The non-existent is whatever we have not
sufficiently desired."

-- Nikos Kazantzakis

 

[cabbySHE]

In some other country...yes.

 

[HHenrYY]

hmmm . mayb this thread sld rename as
"photography : only done using expensive SLR ?"
haha..

like some said,

can be done with a pinhole camera too.

and what eyes did was awesome ! nice picture.

 

[KingOfNoobs]

i remembered whereever i go i'll just use my phone camera to snap... not good quality though but i just love taking photo... so basically, if we love photography, i'll just use anything to snap... lol...

 

[greg]

As a hobby, is photography only for those who has $$$?

1) Yes
2) No
3) Others

if smoking and drinking alcohol are considered hobbies (I personally don't agree fully), wouldn't those be more expensive than photography? If they're equally expensive, and you can only pick one hobby, would you still pick photography? none of these decision(s) should have any bearing if a hobby is only for those with $$$.

 

[stinkyboy]

For me, photography is more about opportunity, and being at the right place at the right time. The gear, never really played a major role. I am not much of a pixel peeper, I would like to think I am a capturer of moments hahahaha =)

For example, after a week of sunless days, a brief 15 seconds where the sun shone through the cold misery of winter in Kyoto. And I was right there, at the right time, to capture this, with my crappy camera phone..zzzz

Of course, if i had a wide angle lens I could capture a wider shot with the pillars, or if I had a better camera, the colors and IQ would be nicer. but hahaha we work with what we have ah =)

 

[tjana]

the answer is "it depends".

of course the basic premise is you have $$$ left over after you deduct basic expenses like food, clothing, roof over yr head from your salary (change 'salary' to 'pocket money' if not working)

after that, it depends whether you got expensive habits like smoking or clubbing or a penchant for LV bags... depends if you want to join the arms race or 'my lens bigger than yours' game... depends if you get bothered by the limits your equipment start to place on the pictures you produce after a while... depends what you like to shoot, your own kids, sceneries, macro, birds, astronomical objects, or god forbid, everything...

i started out with canon 3000V (film) set costing like $300+ when most people got digital already and still enjoyed photography. a lot can be done with a cheap camera body and 50mm prime lens. heck, a lot can be done with most phone camera models even.

would i have stayed using the same equipment? well, newer, better and relatively more affordable digital SLRs came on board and in the long run that is cheaper than buying film rolls + developing them. but i'm guilty as charged to upgrade from canon XXXD to XXD, for the extra image quality and better ISO performance.

 

[whattokingu]

I guess if you are starving and no roof overhead, it's better to spend the money to buy food, but if you are poor, but with basic necessities satisfied, then it is still a good hobby.

I have a relatively less well-to-do friend, who shoots with Sigma DSLR. A lot of people laugh at him for that when he went competition against people using canons and nikons, which is supposedly better(not forgetting more expensive).

Well, he got the last laugh, he won 1st prize and a D90. The next day, he sold it and gave the money to his mom. He is an inspiration to me, especially when I think about upgrading my body or buy a new lens.