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.
"LOOK AT THAT TINY LENS U NOOB!"
that was funny.
Let's not forget about weight guys. Most of the gold rings are heavyweight zooms. As good as they may be, the weight can sometimes limit the photographer. He becomes less mobile, and he has to shoot the entire day. He don't have the luxury to take a break anytime he fancies.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.
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.
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.
Using limsgp's example, one could say the photographer could very well have made certain shots due to the lighter weight of the camera. Especially with a fast-moving event such as a wedding, you need to be quick on your feet. With a heavier camera he could have more difficulty going into various kneeling, lying, proning positions, resulting in non-ideal shots or absence of such shots. And they may very well also be photos that the couples would like.
I can't comment on whether the gear in TS's example is good enough.. but the main point of discussion is that better gear can potentially deliver better pictures in the right hands.
ok.. well I'm not too familiar with nikon.. but I feel that the Canon 50L or the 85L or even 135L (for e.g.) ;p is not that heavy.. Not practical to carry a fast telezoom to events like wedding right.. unless there is more than 1 PG.
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.
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.
well..what to do?
equipments are really getting so much cheaper, that really every tom, dick, harry, jane, mary, sally has one now..
just minutes ago, i just heard another friend bought a DSLR.
I saw this trend recently...no joke, already 4 couples i know personally..
1) couple getting married
2) couple suddenly realised they are so good-looking after seeing photos taken by their PG with DSLR.
3) couple got spare cash after wedding dinner
4) then since they are going for a honeymoon....
5) lets get a DSLR and we take beautiful photos!!!! DSLR photos are GOD-GIVEN!!!!!
4 couples in 4-5 mths that i know, bought a DSLR after wedding and before honeymoon! ;p
thats nothing compared to the school kids (sec schools) using DSLRs :bsmilie:
at least working adults already working and can buy using their own paycheck... but school kids? :dunno:
Then we have the issue of being limited by not being able to zoom at a twist of the fingers. Which potentially would miss some shots as well wouldn't it?
In short, good equipments does matter. Even the best photographers are limited if asked to shoot with a PnS. But if using reasonably good glass can give certain less tangible advantages than the best glass, why not?
thats nothing compared to the school kids (sec schools) using DSLRs
at least working adults already working and can buy using their own paycheck... but school kids?