More DSLRs spotted

[synapseman]

The guests may have huge cameras with fat lenses.

But,

Do they know how to compose the shot?
Do they know how to direct the couple?
Crowd control/PR skills?
Anticipating the moment?
Damage control if things go wrong?
Are they aware of customs and traditions?
Can they guide the couple who are less knowledgable?
Are they able to have one eye on the viewfinder, walk backwards, and know what's coming into the left and right of the frame at the same time?
Do they have the stamina to keep doing all of this the entire day?

Give any four-year old kid a D3x/1DsIII. I'm sure he or she would know how to press the button, too...

 

[synapseman]

it all depends on the situation.

if you give a world-class photographer a d60 with a 18-55 kit lens, ask him to shoot a lowlight football match, he's going to have a very hard time, pure and simple.

it's time to stop making absolute statements like "it's all about skill and nothing to do with equipment" or "it's about lens, not the body". it clearly isn't, plus these statements are predicated on unrealistic absolutes -- for instance, a non-professional with good gear still has *some knowledge*, not zero knowledge. so the non-pro still can pull some good shots after some practice and reading up.

I guess it all depends on the expectations of the couple, and what is meant by a "good" photo.

"Good" as in technically good? Or asthetically pleasing? Sometimes the line is blurred.

There are some who want "prison line-up" posed shots and all they want to see is brightly lit faces. If the only settings you need is "ISO400, 1/60s, f/5.6", then really any DSLR would do. You can literally shoot an entire wedding banquet that way and everybody would be happy.

But yes, I have to agree with you that too many people make the assumption that "it's not the gear, it's the person". MY assumption is that when people say such things, they don't know what they're talking about.

C'mon people.

The camera AND the person behind the camera BOTH matter.

 

[Limsgp]

I guess what TS meant is that, as the hired photographer, he should have some better equipment so as to be able to deliver better products to his customer. Perhaps he can get the shots that he felt is good enough.. but he could also missed the shots that he could have had, if only he used a faster lens. For e.g.. As an experienced photographer, if he had better gears, he could had more to deliver and make it better value for his customers.

It's not so much about creative expressions using shallow DOF or whatever.. it more of situations like: the couple enters the ballroom, the lights dimmed, the PRO PG with his lens of max 5.6 aperture and ISO 1600 tries to take a shot that the camera calculated to require 1 second shutter speed for proper exposure (this is example only.. lets assume no flash or flash power not enough in that situation, whatever). Most likely, he will forgo such a shot. well.. fine.. but had this shot been taken and not noisy and blurred.. it may be something that the customer liked. (Let's not discuss whether it is possible to take that shot, the key point is, there may be situations that the equipments makes a difference to the Pro PG )

So, in summary.. a PRO with better gears can potentially and probably deliver better value.

This is not about "better equipment = better pictures?" debate, I guess.. so no point talking about non-pro PG with pro gears taking pictures not as good as pro PG with PnS.

I had just attended a friend's wedding and was kinda surprised by the number of DSLRs spotted during the dinner. I counted 5 and managed to differentiate the "official" photographer among the few. He was using a Nikon system and being the AD photographer of the nite, I was also surprised not to find any gold ring on his Nikon lens. On the other hand, one of the bridegroom's guests had a L lens mounted on his Canon 40D. =.="

I'm kinda happy that more and more people are joining the world of DSLR. At the same time, I was really keen to see the work of the AD photographer, shot with his non-fast Nikkor lens.

 

[Limsgp]

Agreed with this.

The camera AND the person behind the camera BOTH matter.

 

[PrimePhotog]

So, in summary.. a PRO with better gears can potentially and probably deliver better value.

This is not about "better equipment = better pictures?" debate, I guess.. so no point talking about non-pro PG with pro gears taking pictures not as good as pro PG with PnS.

Totally agree.Though sometimes I think better equipment is a need.Try shooting a low-light event with a Nikon D1 and a kit lens.Your client would probably scream at you when he/she sees the noise.

 

[Peter Petrelli]

for me its the photographer's composition and creative thinking that really matters when covering events like weddings. of course quick lenses will help a lot but at the end of the day, its how the photos tell how the day went by and did he capture it as nicely as he can and being a professional one, he should be able to.

thats primarily how i look at professionals. its their composition that being paid for.

 

[lsisaxon]

But yes, I have to agree with you that too many people make the assumption that "it's not the gear, it's the person". MY assumption is that when people say such things, they don't know what they're talking about.

C'mon people.

The camera AND the person behind the camera BOTH matter.

Ultimately, its still the people because they are the ones to know what equipment to use for what purpose.

The rich who can afford exotic bodies and lenses and always question why they are not getting the pictures will always remain the envy of those professionals who yearn for those equipment because they know that it would definitely raise the standard of their pictures but do not have enough resources to afford them.

 

[jacobus]

may not be totally relevant, but i find it sad that some people ignorant to photography, tend to judge other people by equipment

i was out that day taking some shots at the birdpark, where this man walking pass me with his humongous zoom, giving me this look like, look at that tiny lens u noob.

though i am really a novice at photography , i think that no matter what we use, be PnS, Prosumer, DSLRs, we are all the same in that we love photography.

i apologise for the probably useless rant, but just speaking my mind.

cheers everyone.

 

[DeSwitch]

By any chance do you all think its possible for the Guest holding the 40D+ L lenses to be a Pro wedding photographer himself? Or the Official photographer was just a friend of the Bride or groom who is under tight budget? :dunno:

Normally I will never bring a DSLR to attend a wedding. Not even a P&S.

 

[Nikonnew]

why are you so focused on the gear? what makes you think the as photographer needs to use G lenses? it's not the tools, it's the photographer. i'd bet that if he used a pns the shots would still be better than the 40D/L lens guest. too many people think you can only shoot good pictures if you buy the most expensive lens.

I am glad this point came up again, (i am not picking a fight here), but if this is as true as it has been widely claimed, then all "pros" should be carrying with them an Ixus, or casio, or Fujifilm Fxx, no? This will probably save them tons of money.

With the amount of money that all these gears demand, i believe it will make a difference....I really do.

What I do believe,however,is.....in the hands of a pro, a D5000, will have better results then a D300 in my hands.:embrass:

 

[Peter Petrelli]

may not be totally relevant, but i find it sad that some people ignorant to photography, tend to judge other people by equipment

i was out that day taking some shots at the birdpark, where this man walking pass me with his humongous zoom, giving me this look like, look at that tiny lens u noob.

"LOOK AT THAT TINY LENS U NOOB!"

that was funny.

 

[Titan10k]

50% light, 40% photographer, 10% gear.

10% does make some differences, still 10% < 40%.

 

[cheguthamrin]

**scratches head
Whats really the probem here?
More ppl with more DSLR? Or more cameramen @ weddings? Or official photographer in lesser gear than guests?

I dont see any problem with all these.
- More ppl more DSLR - means DSLR is getting affordable and shouldnt it be good news for all? More to share more to learn? More CS members?

- More cameraman @ weddings - means more ppl are trying out their own DSLRs for their own personal photo collections w/o waiting for the offical photographer to develop the photos. Guests are guests, they came they capture that limited moments of the wedding occasion, while the official was tasked to cover the entire event. The wedding couple, could have asked their guests for the shots they took FOC, since they're their guests / friends / family members.

- More gear less gear - its still the end products. The couple had their homework done before engaging the photographer.

 

[sprewell]

this thread is super off topic..

but im glad that dslr and photography is so widely available to the masses. isnt tt a good thing?

just today at punggol i came across at least 3 groups of hobbysts having some fun photography sessions, nevermind what lens or camera they are using..

 

[oTaRu]

i had seen a photographer who is using a non-L lens and shoot much better than some others who are using L lens...

not that I bias to whoever he is or to anything other thing... but what I say is the photographer must understand how to optimize his lens capability and how to achieve a good photo out of it...

 

[zaren]

I had just attended a friend's wedding and was kinda surprised by the number of DSLRs spotted during the dinner.

Not surprising these days. lots of ppl own dslrs and bring them along during weddings.

I counted 5 and managed to differentiate the "official" photographer among the few. He was using a Nikon system and being the AD photographer of the nite, I was also surprised not to find any gold ring on his Nikon lens. On the other hand, one of the bridegroom's guests had a L lens mounted on his Canon 40D. =.="

Again not surprising. He could have been shooting with a Tamron 17-50/2.8, or Nikon 50/1.4, etc etc, which are not "gold ring" lenses but are used by some wedding pro photogs.

I'm kinda happy that more and more people are joining the world of DSLR. At the same time, I was really keen to see the work of the AD photographer, shot with his non-fast Nikkor lens.

How do you know they were non-fast lenses? The lenses I mentioned earlier as examples are "fast" lenses.

As many have already stated on this thread, it is entirely possible to create "pro looking" photographs with more affordable DSLR equipment.

 

[liarliar]

I even more super. I no need lens nor camera or pns. I turn up only all phtographers and non photograhers want to stop me from even talking to my subjects. See how power i am
It me and what i can do that they fear

 

[night86mare]

SB-900 i believe has a range that covers up to 200mm, need check the specs again. It may help a little in landscape shots too to light up darker areas. Go experiment will know the effects and answers.

i have seen flashgun instance of use in landscape photography, that was a relatively moderately large beach structure.

pagoda in chinese garden is not so small, to do it properly you probably need more than one flash. then you think about shenton way, you realise it is impossible. :bsmilie:

 

[liarliar]

Nuke the whole place. Sure enough light.

 

[night86mare]

Nuke the whole place. Sure enough light.

also no pagoda, no photographer, no camera.