Photography pro factor

[EOS Man]

It seems from what I'm seeing nowadays that there's some kinda "pro and/or macho" factor in digital SLR equipment. Apparently the larger your big black camera and/or lens, the more "pro" one is.

Before I went dSLR with my 30D, I was using Canon digital compacts and when taking photos in public, people would just get in my way when composing (ie walk right in front, instead of around me). But from day 1 I got a digital SLR (Canon, because I have a few of their EF lenses from the film ages), that problem seemingly just disappeared and some people even appologized for getting in the way in more than one instance.

Then there's this who's who kinda thing. I have a friend who is a "professional" with all his C.Functions set to "0" (Sarcasm here....) yet all my colleagues and parents at the school I shoot think he's the better photographer and that I'm just some wannabe because he's using a "big professional" Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and I'm using the "tiny noob" EF 75-300 non IS lens. Unlike the bottomless pockets he has, my budget is limited and I can't afford to buy a collection of brilliant lenses (About a year since he first started photography and he's already got a Rebel XT, 5D and about 10 medium to high end lenses)

*Great photos are all about the photographer, and not his equipment* but apparantly 90% of the world doesn't know/aren't aware of this. I don't know if it's an issue for you but what's with this pro factor in terms of equipment? And how can it be suppressed?

[liza]

Look at the outcome rather than the equipment. All the chest thumping in the world doesn't make a gear head a pro. Being a pro entails being paid and making a living from your photography, as well as behaving in a professional manner.

For sports photos, however, it does make a bit of a difference in the tools you use. But you can find reasonably affordable alternatives to "pro" glass. Just save your money and acquire what you need a lens at a time. :)

[squashed]

*Great photos are all about the photographer, and not his equipment* but apparantly 90% of the world doesn't know/aren't aware of this.

What they dont know wont hurt them.

[PhotosGuy]

(About a year since he first started photography and he's already got a Rebel XT, 5D and about 10 medium to high end lenses) I used to know a guy like that & he should become your best friend, 'cause he's always upgrading & needs to sell his "obsolete" equipment at a great price? :D

[EOS Man]

Man, that's great. Unfortunately, he's the kind who holds on to his equipment even when upgrading - wealthy, tries to look pro but cheapskate - tries to get the best (or rather more expensive/bigger) gear at cheap prices; including buying used equipment, I don't know what my friend (rival in terms of photography most of the time :mad: ) is gonna do next in the "looking pro and expensive in the cheapest way possible" campaign... hmmm, maybe dump diving:lol: ?

[elTwitcho]

It seems from what I'm seeing nowadays that there's some kinda "pro and/or macho" factor in digital SLR equipment. Apparently the larger your big black camera and/or lens, the more "pro" one is.

Before I went dSLR with my 30D, I was using Canon digital compacts and when taking photos in public, people would just get in my way when composing (ie walk right in front, instead of around me). But from day 1 I got a digital SLR (Canon, because I have a few of their EF lenses from the film ages), that problem seemingly just disappeared and some people even appologized for getting in the way in more than one instance.

Then there's this who's who kinda thing. I have a friend who is a "professional" with all his C.Functions set to "0" (Sarcasm here....) yet all my colleagues and parents at the school I shoot think he's the better photographer and that I'm just some wannabe because he's using a "big professional" Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and I'm using the "tiny noob" EF 75-300 non IS lens. Unlike the bottomless pockets he has, my budget is limited and I can't afford to buy a collection of brilliant lenses (About a year since he first started photography and he's already got a Rebel XT, 5D and about 10 medium to high end lenses)

*Great photos are all about the photographer, and not his equipment* but apparantly 90% of the world doesn't know/aren't aware of this. I don't know if it's an issue for you but what's with this pro factor in terms of equipment? And how can it be suppressed?


You know, you kind of almost were on the way to having a valid point, and then you said something downright stupid.


Then there's this who's who kinda thing. I have a friend who is a "professional" with all his C.Functions set to "0" (Sarcasm here....)

In one breath you argue against judging a photographer's caliber based on his equipment, and then in another breath you deride a photographer's abilities and mention that he isn't using custom functions as though that is what determines a photographer's skill.

I'm sorry but it seems more like you want to justify why you think you're better than your friend more than anything else here. I have all my custom functions set to 0 as well, I doubt a single one of my clients would be interested in chosing you over me even after you gave an impassioned speach about your custom functions and how they exemplify your skill with the camera :rolleyes:

[Curtis N]

When you drive a truck, people assume you're a truck driver. Human nature, simple as that.

Yes, it's true that when you carry gear that looks professional, people will assume you have been hired to do a job and will offer more courtesy than if they think you're just another tourist. I see it all the time. People avoid walking in front of me, or apologize when they do. A flash bracket, monopod or big lens will lead to these assumptions.

You aren't going to change human nature, so you may as well accept it. Concentrate more on learning your craft and less on who is carrying what gear.

[ssim]

I'm still trying to figure out the point of this post unless it is the following quote from your post, which I think all of pretty much knew.

*Great photos are all about the photographer, and not his equipment*

Even at that, if take really crappy glass in the hands of an excellent photographer, they are going to have issues with getting that perfect shot.

Custom functions are a very nice feature but leaving them zeroed out is not the end of the world. With the exception of a very few, mine are at Canon defaults. Not because I didn't know what to do with them, because they work for me in that position. Same thing with the personal functions, I use a couple of them.

[primoz]

It is unfortunately so, that people think big lens and expensive camera is all they need for good photos. Yes sometimes it helps a lot (especially with sport), but mostly it just doesn't matter. I'm sure someone will be offended by this, but this is noticeable even here on POTN. There's bunch of people "complaining" that they can't get good photos, unless they have 1d, 70-200/2.8 (it has to be IS version otherwise it's crappy lens) and whole bunch of other expensive f2.8 (or less) lenses with IS, and then they always shoot at f11 from tripod :rolleyes: So why "normal" people who are not in photography should be any different ;)

[chtgrubbs]

I was in a fast food joint one evening and there was a guy wearing TWO 1DS bodies each with an L zoom on them! I was so tempted to go up to him and ask him if he was a famous pro photographer. But I guess if you spend that much on photo gear you can only afford to eat at Taco Bell.

[ayotnoms]

I was in a fast food joint one evening and there was a guy wearing TWO 1DS bodies each with an L zoom on them! I was so tempted to go up to him and ask him if he was a famous pro photographer. But I guess if you spend that much on photo gear you can only afford to eat at Taco Bell.
Well, I don't know about the guy you mention but every time I'm toting my 2 bodies and red-ringed lenses, I get Mom-approved free lemonade from all the streetside vendors.

Woo Hoo!! (8(|)

[lhoney2]

I am finding out that the glass is SUPER important. The more I shoot with the kit lens and my 75-300 cheap-o zoom, the more I am finding out how many shots I am simply not able to get.

Light is everything, and lenses that aren't able to gather enough light in a short enough time are going to severely limit your ability to get the shots you want.

I think better equipment will nearly always make your results better.

[MJPhotos24]

Glass and body is extremely important, knowing how to use them is obviously the real key. I bought my "high end" gear cuz I couldn't get the results I wanted with the stuff I had, not to look good or get through a crowd. That equipment made a huge difference as now I get the exact results I want instead of wishing I could with the equipment I had. Then again, I know how to use it (a lot thanks in part to POTN).

Great photographers have great equipment because they know what they need to get the job done. I simply could not get the photos I want with even a Sigma 70-200 2.8 (I have one, and it can't do what I want in most situations). The Sigma I have is great, but doesn't have the clarity of a Canon, and clarity is what gets pics published.

During the summer at games I "photog watch" - in other words, check how the guy with the big time equipment shoots. 95% of the time you can see they know what they're doing and getting what they want, and sometimes you get the guy with $20,000 worth of equipment and its on auto settings as he just points and shoots not understanding why other pics are better. It happens, oh well...either way, sounds like someones a bit jealous...

[Scott-JL]

Apparently the larger your big black camera and/or lens, the more "pro" one is.

Black body and a couple of white lenses here. Must make me super-pro. ;)

Seriously, don't let it get to you. I get the impression that the lens thing is probably more a mental block for you than it is for anyone else. You can't be frustrated by these kind of things, as there's always someone with better hardware, there's always someone with better access, a better angle, or ability.

My advice is take your pictures, do your thing, and let other people follow you. You just need the confidence in yourself, your gear, and your ability. Don't let other people and other things phase you dude!! :D


PS, on the subject of gear and peoples reactions, I had a 30D with a 300F4ISL+1.4TC, a 300D with a 70-200 and had to fight for two hours in Valencia just to get near the front of the stands so I could take some pictures. Didn't work for me eh?!!

[vwpilot]

There are always extreme statements in both directions on this topic. Some say that having great equipment allows you to get great photos, some say that you can get great photos with any equipment if you are good enough.

Well, both are both true and false. There are no absolutes here. Just the same as those that think they need photo credentials to get good shots at an event. There are always shots that you simply cannot get no matter how good you are without photo access and at the same time, there are a lot of great shots that you CAN get without photo access.

In all cases its about how you use the gear.

If you have great gear, you still need to know what to do with it. How many times have you heard "wow, great photo, you must have a nice camera." Well, yes I do, but I would hope that I could get a nice shot without it as well. But I might not be able to get THAT shot.

I'm certainly not going to be able to shoot motorsports with an AE-1 and a 70-210 manual focus lens and get all the same shots as I can with my 1D and 500 f/4. Just isnt going to happen.

At the same time though, if I'm just shooting candid portraits in the pits, then I should be able to come away with all the same shots as I could with my 70-200 IS and 1D.

Nothing in this industry is absolute. Sometimes you NEED the equipment and the access to get certain shots. But sometimes you should be able to do just fine with even the most basic equipment.

If you are a bad photographer than no amount of gear will make you better. However, if you are already good, then having the right gear for the job will make it easier and in some cases be the only way to get the shot.

But you're right in the sense that sometimes "looking" the part (with the big camera and lens) will make others assume you actually know what you are doing. I dont know the number of times I have seen "photographers" in places they shouldnt be simply because they walked in there looking like they were supposed to be.

[wannabegood]

It's like MJ said for me, I shot over 12K pics on my 20D and simply thought they should be better quality, don't know if mine was a tad soft or it's the norm, anyway, I moved up to the 5D looking for razor sharpness. I'm new, have sold very little, but [U]I[U] demand the very best picture I can take, before I'll sell it to someone else. For me it's a bit humbling to have people think I'm a "Pro" because of that equipment, because I know just how long a road it is!
All we can do is aim high and learn all we can, practice, work with the people that want our work, and leave to others their otherness. It's all perception and individualism anyway, so have fun and enjoy it! :)

[primoz]

I'm certainly not going to be able to shoot motorsports with an AE-1 and a 70-210 manual focus lens and get all the same shots as I can with my 1D and 500 f/4. Just isnt going to happen.
Jim this isn't entirely true. We are both in this thing long enough (you are probably even longer) that we know photography didn't start with invetion of digital cameras and/or auto focus. There are great photos done with manual cameras without any motors and af. Can it be done? Sure. How hard it is? Extremly.
Ok I agree motorsport is different thing to shoot nowadays, then it was 30 years ago (not that I would be shooting it that time, or nowadays either... at least not all that much :)). Safety is better, buffer zones are bigger etc. so shorter lenses are out of question for most of stuff. But for example boxing or basketball didn't change much. Skiing (except for alpine skiing) didn't change much, except speed went up a bit, whole lot of other sports didn't change much. And people were shooting those sports 30 or 50 years ago and they made photos which are still first class photos even nowadays.
So it is possible. But at least for me, better equipment means easier work (we are lazy by nature, which isn't even bad thing... most of time:)), more photos that can sell, and on the end more money.
But I still think a lot of stuff can easily be shoot with less then top of the line equipment. And I also agree, sometimes right equipment is only way to get certain photo.

[vwpilot]

primoz, again, like my post was trying to point it, to an extent you are right.

However, I'm not going to get a shot like this with an AE-1 and a 70-210 no matter how good I am, it just isnt going to happen. Of course, the lens is a bigger issue in many instances.

http://www.motorsportsimaging.com/prints/images/DysonMG_Sunset.jpg

I needed the 500 for that or else its going to be something with a severe crop and wont have the same framing and perspective that a long lens provides.

Sure, I can go out and shoot a race with a basic lens and camera, but I wont come back with the same images I would with different gear. You simply cant get some shots without the right gear.

Sure, good shots have been made for years with old cameras, doesnt mean any of us couldnt do the same if given one today, but look at the kinds of photos being taken today versus the past.

If you actually look at the old stuff, many times its the moment or the subject that makes it a great or famous shot more than the technical aspect of the shot. New cameras and lenses allow us to get both.

I was in Sebring recently for testing and during a media dinner we were in the hotel that is on site there. They have photography on the walls from the 50 years the race has been going on. I was looking at them with another photographer or two and we were all looking at them, then one of them asked us how many of those shots on the walls would have been keepers for us today.

It was funny he mentioned that, becuase two seconds before I was actually thinking how poor the photographs were by todays standards. All of us said they would have all been in our trash bins. They were static, they showed little emotion and were, for lack of a better word, snapshots. But here they were, hanging on the wall in an expensive hotel on the grounds of Sebring raceway. Not for how good the shots where, but for what was in them. It was the history of the track. It was the old time racers, with leather helmets. It was the shots of Mario Andretti and the other famous people. it was the shots of the Shelby Daytona Coupes and the other famous cars. It was all about the subjects.

So when you really look at old stuff, for the most part, many times they are not actually as good as the photos that are being made today, its just what they are and what they stand for.

Todays equipment allows us to do both. It allows us now a freedom and expression in our shots that was not possible many years ago. There are things we can do today, if for no other reason than just the ability to freely experiment without burning up film, that were not possible without plain luck in the past.

I dont see many shots from the 50s of swimmers shot from the bottom of the pool. I dont see shots from the 50s taken from the top of the backboard, or from the rafters of a hockey arena. Today those things are made possible by things like water housings and remote shutter releases.

The gear from today has totally opened up the world of photography and there are times where you cannot get a shot without that gear. Its that simple.

Can I go out and shoot a race and come back with good shots with a manual camera on film. Sure. Will I come back with the same stuff or as much "cutting edge" stuff as I will with my digital cameras, long lenses and radio remotes..no way.

[Jon, The Elder]

You aren't going to change human nature, so you may as well accept it. Concentrate more on learning your craft and less on who is carrying what gear.

CurtisN said it well.

I go into a shoot, looking, acting, and talking (if necessary) like I have all the confidence in the world, know my subject, and am there with a definate purpose.

But I do take the propeller off my Avatar.

[JWright]

Definition of a Professional Photographer: "A photographer who make 51% of more of his income from photography."

[krazziecliff]

IMHO lenses do play a huge part in photography. And I think the very fact that you can afford one warrants a bit of respect. Its like someone driving a ferrari and heads turn and you cry about the fact that your way better a driver in your toyota. who cares how good you are. people walking around dont see your pictures. simple. so yeah, the gear commands respect because your photographs are not on display and I'm guessing your not famous enough to be distinguished yet.

[Mark_Cohran]

I was in a fast food joint one evening and there was a guy wearing TWO 1DS bodies each with an L zoom on them! I was so tempted to go up to him and ask him if he was a famous pro photographer. But I guess if you spend that much on photo gear you can only afford to eat at Taco Bell.

Or perhaps, like you, he likes Taco Bell.

Mark

[ghaleon109]

Am I dense...?

I dont understand the CFn = 0 = Pro thing... seems like a lot of you have heard this before???

[breal101]

I was in a fast food joint one evening and there was a guy wearing TWO 1DS bodies each with an L zoom on them! I was so tempted to go up to him and ask him if he was a famous pro photographer. But I guess if you spend that much on photo gear you can only afford to eat at Taco Bell.

If grubbs had actually asked the guy that question and received a high-res proctal exam in return he would have deserved it. Taco Bell? Warren Buffett eats at Burger King.

[canoflan]

This is unfortunate, however, my friend at church who is a pro bought a battery pack for his Nikon because he said the clients expected the large camera look if they are paying all the money. Funny that they are looking at the camera, and not their prints. You know what? I think that if people get prints that are mediocre from a big fancy pro camera, they think that is the best there they can get. We all know that it is what you are shooting, not with, that has a great deal to do with the end product.

One thing that amazes me is that he uses the onboard flash instead of the large strobe flash (and they say that Nikon has a better flash system) and he uses a diffuser thingy as well. If I was expecting the big camera look with a D200 and battery grip and see that little onboard flash popup, I would probably think things were a bit lop-sided.

[cosworth]

You don't win an F1 race in a mini.

People will always perceive gear with skill. This cannot be avoided. Use it to your advantage or be left behind.

We are selling to the Great Unwashed, sell them the pictures and the experience of being shot by a pro. Or the next guy will...

[turbo212003]

I say don't worry about it. Gear whores will always be around.

[lhoney2]

Take two photographers of equal skill. Give one of them the better equipment, and there's a pretty good chance he'll come away with the better shot.

[Blue S2]

Custom functions??? They are just a way to adapt the tools we have to better suit shooting individual style. Equipment are just tools.

With improvements in the tools we have, new things can be done that once weren't. This allows new creativity. I know photographers still shooting film exclusively without anything fancy that are getting inspiring photographs all the time. They don't even have a preview or a histogram!

Some tools work better than others...some people work better with certain tools than others. It all comes down to a person seeing images.

[wannasmaxx]

Am I dense...?

I dont understand the CFn = 0 = Pro thing... seems like a lot of you have heard this before???
It's basically saying that the 'tog doesn't either know his/her camera very well or doesn't care about using the equiqment to it's full potential. IE.. CF4-1 or 3 makes a sports shooter's life WAY easier

[primoz]

It's basically saying that the 'tog doesn't either know his/her camera very well or doesn't care about using the equiqment to it's full potential. IE.. CF4-1 or 3 makes a sports shooter's life WAY easier
That's not entirely true. Yes I agree that for me personally it's easier with Cfn4 set to 3. But if your statement would be true, this wouldn't be custom function but something turned on like this by default ;)
Custom function is just an option to set camera so that it suits you best. And something what fits me best, doesn't feel same for you ;) And maybe for someone Cfn4 set to 0 is perfect way to shoot... even sport.

[Jon, The Elder]

Sell the sizzle......the steak will take care of itself.