Camera Upgrade Question

[a b]

Better cameras don’t necessarily take better pictures.  What specific shortcomings does your current setup have that cannot be addressed by improving your skill and technique, and can only be improved by acquiring new equipment?  What specific pieces of equipment will address those shortcomings, and how?  If you can’t come up with specific answers to these questions, don’t spend a dime.  This is why I still use a D90 with a Tokina ultrawide, a 35mm f1.8, and a handful of 1980s era Nikon prime tele lenses. (I am not a pro – just somebody who shoots for fun. Here’s some samples: http://www.slickpic.com/u/chiefmanyrabbitguteat)

[JLiu]

Thanks for the confidence boost, sir!  I’m flattered…but am seriously just an amateur.  Most of the stuff I say is regurgitated from any other photography site, plus whatever experience I have from trial and error.

A tutorial section would be interesting – perhaps bring it up with the admins?

[dont.care]

Actually NO camera takes a good photo if the operator sucks.. I let a clients father (self professed photographer) use my 5d III / 70-200 2.8 II shoot some photos before everything was set to begin; this person being someone who claimed years and years of experience. When I dumped my CF card into LR, I nearly died at how shitty the images the 5d iii can produce..

And, chiefmanyrabbitgutea — You missed the boat on this conversation; you say you’re not a pro.. She’s wanting to be.. I can’t tell you how embarrassed it would be, if a pro were to come to an event with a T4 and a 1.8 50 surrounded by colleagues and peers..

 

p17

[JLiu]

That’ll teach you to hand your camera off to someone.  I would’ve run with it…hahah

[dont.care]

Well, they paid me nearly 4 grand for the event, and he was footing the bill.. So, I didn’t mind.. I also have what most fauxtogs don’t.. Insurance =P

Of course this will forever be an inside joke as I will never convey my dismay of his images for as long as I do this for a living.. I’m just happy he’s never asked for those photos 😉

[Brownie]

I agree, save your money, and if you do invest in something, invest in good glass. A solid prime lens will help any aspiring photographer immensely.

[dont.care]

Or, impede them greatly.. Some of the new zooms are less than equal to a prime, but definitely minutely.. This person is strugging with DOF on a 50 1.8.. I’d dump the idea all together until I had the $$ to upgrade lens and camera.. But, I’d definitely not limit myself to a single prime on a tight budget.. if you’re going to buy glass, buy a 24-70 II or a 70-200 II..

Personally, I think a 50 on a 1.6x factor sensor is tight in most situations, so really a 35mm would be better.. but then there’s portraits, so you’d either need to make due with the 35 or buy an additional prime.. Either way, it’s a money pit and you’re going to spend more money buying primes vs just gettng a high end zoom.. I’d go with zoom; primes can wait

[a b]

I am not a pro, as I said earlier, but I think I am decent at what I do.  Having a job that is not photography doesn’t make me ignorant on the subject. You can check out the link in my previous post to see if you disagree.  Regardless, buying an pro-level DSLR simply because you would look silly with a consumer-level DLSR seems like a dumb thing to me.  There are many good reasons an aspiring pro should upgrade, but I don’t think that an upgrade is justified without a specific need that an upgrade will address.

 

[dont.care]

Eh? I think you’ve misconstrued entirely what I was attempting to point out..

A) Pros use high end gear mostly because of durability, flexibility and newer gear typically handles things like noise more efficiently resulting in higher IQ at higher ISO’s whereby increasing the usability and dynamics of the hardware (speaking of bodies); lenses, they upgrade them because of better optics, better AF, better motors, better overall everything, including durability.

B) At what point did I call you ignorant? I basically echoed what you said about not being a pro–Not that you’re “not a pro” and that you are ignorant.. I was pointing out the fact that you in general, wouldn’t ‘need’ to spend thousands when you don’t need to or want to because you don’t have a career or reputation riding on your ability to produce, reproduce, and generate the same results consecutively or need to worry about your equipment failing on you.

I apologize about your inability to read between the lines — We (I) were (was) simply pointing out the fact, that if you’re going to take a punch at going pro, there’s alot more involved that what’s initially perceived.

So yes, if you’re going to be a professional photographer or anything for that matter you’re certainly expected to have proper tools for the job.. Some clients will actually SPEC the gear you will be required UNDER CONTRACT to use. So, again–yes if you’re going to be a professional, you need to have the gear that’s to par with the industry standard ..

Would you show up at a auto shop with walmart Stanly tools and expect to be taken seriously whilst applying for a job? You’d probably get laughed at and told to leave. Any mechanic worth his weight in gold, will also be worth his weight in tools that are industry standard, Mac Tools, MatCo, SK, Craftsmen–you know? Craftmen being the low end of that scale, but some SK wrenches can cost several hundred dollars each..

But ya, I wasn’t making a dig at you..

[Stefany0219]

Thanks again for the advice and constructive criticism.    I  haven’t had time yet to play around with that raw file, but I will take a look later and play around with your directions.    Again, I appreciate all of this, but I just have to rant for a moment.  I know it’s easy to rant online, but since this is the medium we’re choosing, I’ll go with it.  I  believe this forum to be extremely helpful and really gives photographers(aspiring, amateur, pro, etc) a place to share, get some tips, offer critiques, and so forth.  However, I’m pretty sure every photographer started somewhere, and those that actually became pro, should be humble about their beginnings.  The photos on the front page of this website are obviously horrific, and I just encountered someone who directed me to another facebook page of a “photographer” whose pictures looked like they were taken with a cell phone.  But, someone like that doesn’t even look like they’re even making ANY effort to better themselves or the art they claim to love.  I love the art of photography.  I can’t picture myself doing anything else.  The reason it even took me so long to further it this much was mostly due to being sucked in to working at a 9 to 5 corporate job, which, thankfully, I left and decided to follow my passion.  I feel like I’m making much more of an effort than some people, time wise and financial wise, so while yes, I want the advice and criticism, for this to turn into a war of words is kinda silly.  We should just appreciate each other for what we are trying to do and talk about what we love doing.  I have been told to not let the equipment be the only thing that I feel is keeping me down.  And I thank you for that advice.  But then in the next breath, my equipment that right now is the only thing I can afford gets laughed at.  I’m 100% aware that the t4 is not professional grade quality by any means, but I am working hard at learning this camera and photography in general, and then I feel like once I have the money, I should go out there and buy the more expensive camera and learn with that one.  So, the ones that are charging people or even having the balls to put up a website under a photography “name” and are shooting with a $100 point and shoot should be embarrassed and insulted, but there are legitimate people out there, like myself, while I may  not have the BEST photos out there just yet, I am working really hard at improving that, and frankly, some of my photos are not all that bad.  I would never advertise myself as professional, but I think credit should be given where credit’s due.  That’s all..let this be a positive forum and not turn into “i’m better than you”(unless you’re talking to those people I just mentioned”.  Thanks again. 🙂

[dont.care]

Nah, we’re not warring of the words! 😀 I think you have great potential, I actually think anyone who invest time in anything has great potential. Like you said really, motivation and the willingness to learn are key to perpetuate the absorption of knowledge into your skull =P once you tweak your crops, correct your color balancing and work on your composition; get the DOF thing ironed out– I think you’ll be fine

 

[fstopper89]

I agree very much with the OP and dont.care. A T4 can get you some excellent portraits if you know how to use it well and have good lenses. It’s pretty incapable of shooting a wedding though. You need better AF and better noise handling at high ISO. A 35mm prime on your crop body is a good portrait lens when you factor in the 1.6 crop factor. It’s too wide on a full-frame camera for most portraiture.

I agree fully that you should get some more practice, read up on stuff, and invest in good EF mount lenses that you can use on your T4 and will be able to eventually use on a higher-end body when you get one. Like the others have said, a 24-70 or 70-200 are good. If you’re doing portraits on the crop body I’d probably suggest a 24-70 for a normal-range portrait lens first. Wait a bit, the 5D Mark III will probably go down in price in about 2 years (maybe??) or there will be another new body that is better by that time. I like your image of the ballet legs. It looked a bit soft though and I agree that the highlights were a little blown but it did have a dreamy effect. Not at all a bad image!

I still have to do that microadjustment thing. I’m excited to see how that helps with my lens…

[a b]

Hey dont.care

Thanks for the clarification.  I agree with everything you said.   I said what I said because I see way too many people who call themselves aspiring (pro) photographers that falsely believe that their own shortcomings are the fault of their camera.  One in particular, a former coworker, didn’t understand how to select the focal point on her D3100.  She believed that the (kit) lens was not sharp, when it was really just not properly focused.  She was already charging for her work within literally days of getting her D3100 two-lens kit, and had no prior experience.  She shot on either Green Box Auto or No-Flash Auto. Not even P, much less SAM. She wanted to upgrade to a D800 with a 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8, thinking that it would make her photos better.  I know that she was an extreme example, so hopefully the author of this topic doesn’t think that I am accusing her of  wanting to upgrade so prematurely.

I am simply saying that somebody who ‘goes pro’ should have previously developed the skills necessary to get a real benefit out of owning professional level equipment, and that simply purchasing professional level equipment as a beginner will not make that person a better photographer. On that, I think we are all in agreement, aren’t we?

As for hand tools, I’m a Craftsman guy.  The lifetime warranty is nice, they are inexpensive and tough, and since I am not a professional mechanic, they are more than good enough for working on my ’47 Willys CJ-2A and my ’84 Toyota Pickup

[dont.care]

i like cheap ass kobalt myself, Lol

[Sarah]

If cost is a concern id go with the original Canon 5D and a L lens or two. I love my 5D and it was a big step up from my 40D. Though completely exhaust your current camera. If you can successfully do a shoot with it and for whatever reason need something better then upgrade. I had successfully shot many weddings with my Canon 40D.

[Author]

Posts