What is a professional camera?

[patpoh]

Well said.

could not agree more... Those are cam whores who go chasing camera instead of getting a better picture... I was like that last time.. So I can say... hahaha.. But I AM still abit like one..but it's more of wanting to buy and play play and let my 'students' play play.. hahaha;p;p

The camera only makes the job easier... It does not mean it will give you better images...

 

[lightning]

Ask the manufacturer "which is your professional camera?"

 

[jackb]

Wow! Very intereting points!

My opinion is: a professional camera is a tool that helps someone to earn a living, be it costs a few thousand bucks or couples of hundred bucks, it does not matter. As long as it commands a demand for their photographs, it shall be termed as " professional camera". Some may argue that amateur photographer may earn something out of their demand, that is true, nevertheless, this is only their side line which unlike the full time professional, for example the journalist, studio photographer etc. ( I have seen some studio used very classic Nikon FE2 to shoot passport photo a few years back, i will classify it as a pro-cam)
There is really no fix definition for a professional camera, like above a five thousand bucks consider one, below that just a semi pro or amateur. Yes, Camera manufacturers have their own marketing strategy so as to impart the impression that professional photograher must use one (Pro-cam) in order to make them like one. Not necessary and not always true. If I buy a so called Pro-cam worth $10K+, it will not make me like one( professional photographer) and i wont classify it as a pro-cam, it is just my toy, I may just use it to shoot once in a year!
Just my 2 cents:angel:

 

[catchlights]

I came across this point and someone commented that for those pro whose business are that profitable, they are quite fortunate indeed because they can afford the best for work and play.

Imagine leicas, hasselblads and all those gorgeous lens.

it is just a tool of the trade, what is there to admire/envy/drool about?

 

[Tantalize]

it is just a tool of the trade, what is there to admire/envy/drool about?

Of coz there are something to envy about, when you buy a camera, it will be an expense for you, however if pros buy it, it will be a tax-deductible items for them, not for you.

In simple words, for pros, they buy cameras to reduce tax (savings increase) and you buy cameras to reduce your own savings

 

[catchlights]

Of coz there are something to envy about, when you buy a camera, it will be an expense for you, however if pros buy it, it will be a tax-deductible items for them, not for you.

In simple words, for pros, they buy cameras to reduce tax (savings increase) and you buy cameras to reduce your own savings

still, you don't get it,

cameras or lenses are just tools, what matter most is what image can a photographer create, not what he/she has/using/own.

 

[beautifulworld]

it still comes back to the question: will a pro use a consumer camera to do a professional job? I am not a professional so i cannot answer that question. But searching through the net, the answers appear to be yes if the client is happy with the prints. In the end, it boils down to your skills as shown in your prints and your clients if they like your prints.

Just to share, i came across a different question: will a pro buy a leica? Apparently some do - but for the pleasure of photography and not so much for business. Canon, not Leica seems to be the camera of choice for professionals today. The reasons given are that the pool of leica professionals are dwindling due to cost of the leica setup, some limitations of the rangefinder and advancement of digital technology in the japanese brands. Another reason given was that nikon made a tactical error which gave canon the edge today.

Btw, i am a newbie as much as anyone here so if i say something not correct, please excuse me and of course, correct my error.

So let me refine the question: if a person intends to be a pro in the wedding business - actual day and studio photography, which basic model/brand + 2 or 3 lens will he start off with, that can fulfill the conflicting demands of both?

My opinion is a prosumer model with a 24mm prime, 50mm prime and a 70-200mm zoom. (Excluding medium/large formats for now - i do not know much about them)

For the benefit of others, maybe opinions can be expressed on landscape, macro, etc too.

And since starting photographers cannot afford to turn down jobs, going on the canon system and thereafter building a collection of lenses seems to be the better bet.

What do you think?

 

[spheredome]

No to confuse with professional's camera. It is the camera that a typical professional use.

A professional equipment is a market term to describe an equipment grade used by experts within a certain field for serious or pricey application. Early manufacturers uses terms to differentiate the market value of products from appliance to precision.
Thus professional camera define a grade of cameras used in the prestige industry. Medical (not doctors) has their own industrial grade precision equipment and so is security/law (not lawyers).

For now, the term professional camera is still used to describe a camera build to handle difficult situation or more demanding requirement by build, feature, plugs, accessories, value, industrial compatibilities used by professional photographer. Most importantly the manufacturer's specification. A compact camera can only be described as a "professional's" camera used by Mr Kent for example. So the Leica compact for instance, can be considered as professional branded camera.
All those accessories that makes a P&S able to take picture in odd situation are considered precision accessories but does not make that camera professional but professional's equipment. A compact camera plated with 24K gold and filled with diamonds like Minox are jewellery camera (not prof).

Prosumer grade cameras refers to products made for consumer market with the ability to achieve professional level usage at a lower cost. This means reduced function, material etc. So there are Prosumer full-frame (since FF is associated to the professional grade) but no prosumer dSLR (dSLR is a generic description). However it is worth to know that image branding cost money too because of royalties for paid reputational designs.

Thus is all about association of the certain words to a class/grade based on history. But we don't challenge to change it because these terms professional camera still have it's placement.

 

[PrimePhotog]

Not true.I know a few pros using Leica for daily work.Most of these Leica shooters are in Japan though.Anyways, 1Ds Mk 3 will be worth pennies in 3 years or so time.Leica M6 will still be at least $1.4k.Film will die unless Leica and Cosina go bankrupt and all us film shooters die.That means Leica would be (or should be?) still around for at least another half-century?I will still love my Leica then.:heart:

 

[skyfokker]

I use my cameras to make a living but there was never such fanfare amongst my peers as to what a pro camera is. Whatever gets the job done is fine. A camera is meant to take a picture. Not take you away from taking pictures. Peace.

 

[luntut]

a long time ago, when i was spotted with a D40 with 18-55, my friends went: wahhhh playing with plofessional camera sia!

now, when i am spotted outside with a D300 with 17-55, my friends go: get a life and stop playing with toys la...

so what am i holding now?

to TS: does it matter what pple think, if you are a hobbist, whether its professional or nt? if you are a professional shooter, then you wun be asking this question at all.

 

[night86mare]

Of coz there are something to envy about, when you buy a camera, it will be an expense for you, however if pros buy it, it will be a tax-deductible items for them, not for you.

In simple words, for pros, they buy cameras to reduce tax (savings increase) and you buy cameras to reduce your own savings

wow, so good, i go and be professional photographer now....

so easy everyone go and be!!!!!! can BBB and reduce tax!!!!!!!! :bsmilie::bsmilie::thumbsup:

 

[aloyyolaaloy]

Not true.I know a few pros using Leica for daily work.Most of these Leica shooters are in Japan though.Anyways, 1Ds Mk 3 will be worth pennies in 3 years or so time.Leica M6 will still be at least $1.4k.Film will die unless Leica and Cosina go bankrupt and all us film shooters die.That means Leica would be (or should be?) still around for at least another half-century?I will still love my Leica then.:heart:

film wont die even if leica or cosina dies. there's still lomography, MF, LF . ;p

 

[catchlights]

it still comes back to the question: will a pro use a consumer camera to do a professional job? I am not a professional so i cannot answer that question. But searching through the net, the answers appear to be yes if the client is happy with the prints. In the end, it boils down to your skills as shown in your prints and your clients if they like your prints.

Just to share, i came across a different question: will a pro buy a leica? Apparently some do - but for the pleasure of photography and not so much for business. Canon, not Leica seems to be the camera of choice for professionals today. The reasons given are that the pool of leica professionals are dwindling due to cost of the leica setup, some limitations of the rangefinder and advancement of digital technology in the japanese brands. Another reason given was that nikon made a tactical error which gave canon the edge today.

Btw, i am a newbie as much as anyone here so if i say something not correct, please excuse me and of course, correct my error.

So let me refine the question: if a person intends to be a pro in the wedding business - actual day and studio photography, which basic model/brand + 2 or 3 lens will he start off with, that can fulfill the conflicting demands of both?

My opinion is a prosumer model with a 24mm prime, 50mm prime and a 70-200mm zoom. (Excluding medium/large formats for now - i do not know much about them)

For the benefit of others, maybe opinions can be expressed on landscape, macro, etc too.

And since starting photographers cannot afford to turn down jobs, going on the canon system and thereafter building a collection of lenses seems to be the better bet.

What do you think?

actually, you can just go straight to the point at your first post,

I want to be a wedding photographer, can I get Canon 50D/500D with 24mm prime 50mm prime and a 70~200mm zoom as start, is this set up good enough?

you will have your answers right away.

 

[beautifulworld]

catchlights, actually i have many questions - that is only one of them. To me, it is more a systematic process of making a good start. That is why the fundamental question: what is a professional camera? Is leica the way to go? Or canon? Or it does not matter? If canon, what configuration? And configuration of course depends on specialization. This may also be helpful to others who share the same aim of being a professional one day.

luntut, no i am not a professional photographer. Just a hobbyist. However i hope to be one one day provided my skills develop.

anyway thank you everyone for your contributions to this thread and i hope the answers here by various people will be helpful to those seeking similar answers.

once again, thank you

 

[jeremyteocx]

oops a little too late with my reply, but here's my simple and short 2 cents ...

a professional camera is any camera used by a professional photographer, and imo a 'professional' here would juz depend on one word ... 'experience'

also, as much as how the logic of 'it doesnt matter what equipment is used, it all depends on the person behind the camera' is true, i don't buy that its totally true. as much as how it is more important to have a gd photographer, one can't deny the fact that having a good camera produces (or at least helps to produce) better shots, which will in turn provides a better overall experience etc ... throwing a mid-end DSLR to a beginner will not make him more pro, but it definitely beats throwing him a compact camera with lousier IQ than the DSLR ...

 

[luntut]

luntut, no i am not a professional photographer. Just a hobbyist. However i hope to be one one day provided my skills develop.

I have seen wedding photographers use a good mix of canon and nikon, and even pentax.

I have seen wedding photographers use a variety of lens, from 14-24, to 17-55 and 24-70, to even 85/1.4 primes. and they are good in what they shoot. they know exactly wat style they do, and what lens they need to get the photos they need.

i dun mean to be harsh, but don even think of flying ebfore you can barely walk. you hardly know your own shooting style, you wanna do something that earns u money. who knows, your shooting talent might not lie with weddings but sports or fashion? they need quite different stuff from weddings, not totally different.

and btw, at the end of the day, what you can shoot well in, depends on you. gears only help you get the shots. YOU are still the one getting it. so get a camera system, start shooting, and learn from your shots, and IMPROVE. and then see where your talent lies.

at least thats how i think.

 

[night86mare]

I have seen wedding photographers use a good mix of canon and nikon, and even pentax.

why EVEN PENTAX ...

what you mean huh huh huh huh huh :bsmilie:

 

[beautifulworld]

also, as much as how the logic of 'it doesnt matter what equipment is used, it all depends on the person behind the camera' is true, i don't buy that its totally true. as much as how it is more important to have a gd photographer, one can't deny the fact that having a good camera produces (or at least helps to produce) better shots, which will in turn provides a better overall experience etc ... throwing a mid-end DSLR to a beginner will not make him more pro, but it definitely beats throwing him a compact camera with lousier IQ than the DSLR ...

Yeah Jeremy, I did pay a lot of attention to this point that the person behind the camera is more important than the camera itself. After all with a good camera, people respect the camera

And yes Luntut, the most sophisticated cameras in the world will not make me a good photographer if my skill level cannot bring out the best in them. Still beginning with the end in mind is good for the pocket. It can be costly to sell off and start anew.

But guys, sorry if i sounded presumptious or arrogant. I am not.

Cheers!

 

[luntut]

why EVEN PENTAX ...

what you mean huh huh huh huh huh :bsmilie:

ahahaha i juz knew that was coming! cos everybody looks down on Pentax what. You Yan Bu Zhi Tai Shan. SO only the true masters uses Pentax!

After all with a good camera, people respect the camera

And yes Luntut, the most sophisticated cameras in the world will not make me a good photographer if my skill level cannot bring out the best in them. Still beginning with the end in mind is good for the pocket. It can be costly to sell off and start anew.

But guys, sorry if i sounded presumptious or arrogant. I am not.

Cheers!

you are quite true, that beginning with the end in mind, will be easier on the pocket. if you are unsure, go rent the lens that you wanna use for a day or 2, and shoot with them, and discover if they are your style. this is a cheaper option then asking around for all our differing opinions, and end up with nothing of your own. That, is still the best way of testing lens.

And unfortunately in SG, pple hiring shooters looks at equipment too. In my course of helping my colleague hunt for shooters for her AD Wedding, I found 2 types of shooters:
1. Damn good composition and processing skills. Using a D70S or D50. Charging a very reasonable amt for 10 hours job.
2. Damn random composition, and crap processing skills. I tink can be as crap as my PP skills. Using a 5D2 or D700, charging at LEAST 3 times as much.

Quite obvious which one my colleague went for.

moral of the story: gear matters, but not so much. you can get as good shots with a 1500 dollar camera, as you can do so with a 3800 dollar camera. its the person behind the viewfinder working the magic.