Pro equipment

[Jay McLaughlin]

Is there a certain level of equipment that all professional photographers should be using?


With advances in technology in recent years, what makes todays budget DSLR's any worse than using a top end DSLR from 5 years ago?

Surely it's the person behind the camera that takes the shot, and provided the images are big enough and sharp enough for their intended use, it shouldn't matter what camera is being used?

[ssim]

It does matter to a certain degree what camera you use. By this I mean that you need to chose the camera that will do the job. Having said that I don't think that there is any photographer that doesn't want for the top of the line gear. It's a matter of being able to afford it. A full time pro can probably more afford this as not only are they generating income but they also can work in the depreciation as a tax deduction.

There are lots of photographers that use prosumer cameras and do great work with it. Others opt for the 1 series cameras which are designed for harder use. They have a shutter in it that is rated for higher actuations than the prosumer.

It is a blend of the person behind the camera and the gear that they choose to use and the working knowledge of it. This is an age old question/debate.

[Jay McLaughlin]

I shoot with a Canon 400D and to be honest I've used "better" cameras and found them to be far too big and bulky for my taste.

I like to be able to move around and try new angles quickly and easily, which my lightweight 400D lets me do.

Question is, will it cut it in the pro world?

[Sonic Infidel]

Sure it will! As long as you know how to use what you have, you can obtain results that are on par with most pros. Judging from your flickr page, you already know which lens to use in which situation, and your style is pretty well developed, so I don't see any reason you should feel obligated to get the highest priced gear.

[Jay McLaughlin]

I'd rather spash out on a set of L lenses than a better camera.

[liza]

I already have the L's. I want a 5D. :)

[Jay McLaughlin]

I want a ring light!

[Echo63]

i do some part time work for a Wedding Photographer
his company also shoots school Balls (what you americans would call Prom)

for the Ball photography we have a bunch of D60 and 10d's
and he uses his pair of 1dmk2 for the wedding work

the d60s and 10ds perform well enough for the job when shooting balls as the prints will not be any larger than 8x10 and these cameras can print this large fairly easily
if your current equipment works well enough - why change it ?

[Jon, The Elder]

Surely it's the person behind the camera that takes the shot, and provided the images are big enough and sharp enough for their intended use, it shouldn't matter what camera is being used?

Exactly. It's the practice, not the purchase, that makes the photographer.

[sfaust]

While just about any decent camera can be used, there are certain features that are needed in a pro environment. Most DSLR's have the basic features, and so called pro-sumer cameras work quite well in the pro arena for most tasks.

When you need more, it will be for specific applications. Large trade show graphics, 20x24 framed and matted wedding prints, point of sale posters, and so on would require a minimum level of megapixels to render a quality image. Fast auto focus, and the ability to customize the auto focus system, would be required for fast action shooting, sports, and similar usage. For event photographers, excellent high ISO performance is a must to deliver quality images considering the dim lighting conditions. Weather sealing might be needed for pros that shoot in all weather conditions.

So while pro-sumer cameras will work for many pro applications, there are instances where there are issues, or a higher level camera is needed. Many pros tend to gravitate to the pro bodies because its all there. Others will choose a lower level camera that will satisfy the majority of their needs, and rent a higher level camera as needed.

In my option, this is why you see a large variety of cameras in use by pros. Budget, features, specifications, etc, are as different as each photographers shooting environment. In the end, it doesn't matter what you use, as long as it fits the professional need you are hired to fulfill.

[Jay McLaughlin]

I remember when I first had the idea of going pro as a photographer. One of the first photographers I spoke to told me I'd need to get a Medium or Large Format Camera with a digital back if I plan on making any money!

Hahahahahahahaha

[mspringfield]

Is it an absolute necessity? No. However if you are going to be perceived as a Pro by your clients then you need to give that appearance of being a Pro. And in many cases that includes your equipment as well as your attitude.

Here's a scenario for you. Say that you are going to hire a photographer. There are 2 photographers you are considering and you don't know anything about either nor have you ever seen them work. You bring the photographers and their equipment in for an interview. One photographer has a 30D and some good consumer grade glass, a Sigma 70-200 2.8, a Tamron 28-75 2.8, etc. The other pulls out a 1D MkIIN and Canon 24-70 2.8L, a Canon 70-200 2.8L, etc. They both have the same pricing and availability. Who are you going to hire? My guess is the one with the Pro gear even though the 30D photographer could very well be the better photographer.

Michael

[Jay McLaughlin]

It depends on who's doing the hiring. Many people who hire photographers don't know much about the different models out there because they're not photographers. Also, how many people would hire a photographer based purely on the size of their camera and not based on the quality of their work?

Looking professional is easy. To most people, stick a long lens and a flash gun on your camera and you'll look like a pro.

I was on a job recently and opted to use my 50mm f/1.8 lens and the client was shocked at the fact that it didn't zoom. For a moment I thought he was going to question my ability to get what he wanted from the shoot..... He loves the resulting shots!

I'd rather use what I think will help me get the best shots I can, than look like a "professional"

[MJPhotos24]

It depends on who's doing the hiring. Many people who hire photographers don't know much about the different models out there because they're not photographers. Also, how many people would hire a photographer based purely on the size of their camera and not based on the quality of their work?

Looking professional is easy. To most people, stick a long lens and a flash gun on your camera and you'll look like a pro.

I was on a job recently and opted to use my 50mm f/1.8 lens and the client was shocked at the fact that it didn't zoom. For a moment I thought he was going to question my ability to get what he wanted from the shoot..... He loves the resulting shots!

I'd rather use what I think will help me get the best shots I can, than look like a "professional"

Well, I am on the fence a bit. I did a lot of work with "lesser" equipment but it never met MY standards. The equipment just couldnt do what I wanted (personal wants). My clients never complained and never saw the little differences I did, well for the most part as being photo editors getting full files they can tell who's got the best stuff. One photo editor I was chat chitting with on the phone when I mentioned some new gear I got, all of a sudden he's offering to fly me to San Diego to shoot, then this year I'm in FL for two weeks making enough to buy a new Mark IIn, 70-200 2.8 IS, other gadgets and wants that are on my list - so did the mention of my new glass last year help with that? Maybe, as he now knew I had all the gear I needed to take it up a level, and it was ironic he offered all this RIGHT after I mentioned the new equipment.

Looking like a pro, well that depends where you shoot. I could go shoot sport portraits of the local little league with all my old kit equipment and most parents wouldn't have a clue, however they see the L lenses, the roller case full of stuff (to shoot action and portraits all in one as games follow) and there interest steps up a little. Shooting a pro baseball game with my old kit lenses and the other photographers would bump me to the worst spot in the pit. However, with the stuff I have a lot of other togs in stadiums get the heck outta my way (though I always work with them and try not to act more "important" - good photogs work with each other IMO). I also get hounded a bit more with the questions "who you shoot for, can I get contacts for them", etc, etc.

With that all said, I remember doing a band portrait shoot and just couldnt get the darn thing right in terms of the effect I wanted....then finally bam, adjusted some lights (oh no not studio lights, stage lights a guy was holding from the ceiling almost) grabbed a 35mm $20 camera, put my good equipment down, got in a weird angle myself and shot it with that thing! The "old school" effect I wanted was there...and they used it on there CD and all promotional material - go figure.

Oh, as for the 50mm - I have a 1.4 and remember someone asking about it thinking it wouldn't do the job or was just joking how small it was, something like that and I tried to explain what the low f/stop does...I dont think at the time he got it (it blurred the background a ton and made the kid stick out more)....until parents starting complementing asking how I got there kid to "stick out" and then he finally got why that "little thing with no zoom" was used. :)

[mspringfield]

It depends on who's doing the hiring. Many people who hire photographers don't know much about the different models out there because they're not photographers. Also, how many people would hire a photographer based purely on the size of their camera and not based on the quality of their work?

Looking professional is easy. To most people, stick a long lens and a flash gun on your camera and you'll look like a pro.

I was on a job recently and opted to use my 50mm f/1.8 lens and the client was shocked at the fact that it didn't zoom. For a moment I thought he was going to question my ability to get what he wanted from the shoot..... He loves the resulting shots!

I'd rather use what I think will help me get the best shots I can, than look like a "professional"

You are correct. It does depend on who is doing the hiring. Most of the people that I work for are professionals themselves. You walk in to do a job with a prosumer camera and you will be turning around and walking right back out the door. The problem in the "professional photography" industry today is that everyone who owns a DSLR thinks that they are good enough to be a professional and wants to quit their job and be a professional photographer. Most of those that I have met can't even set their own camera. I have been on more that one job where I have had a fellow "professional" photographer walk up, hand me their camera and ask me to set it up for them.

I can get a quality shot out of my SD450 pocket P&S so are you saying that you will hire me to shoot if over the next guy with a 1D MkIIN?

Odds are if you look like a professional in your gear, your dress and you attitude then you will also know how to use your gear and get quality results. Sorry but being a "professional" is more than being able to "get the best shots". I will take a mediocre photographer who acts professional, dresses professional, and has a professional attitude with clients and co-workers over someone who acts like a jerk and dresses like a bum and can get the shots. The photographer is what the client sees and like it or not who you hire reflects on who you are as a company and that includes your gear.

[zacker]

id say it depends on what type of pro you mean, a pro sports guy isnt shooting a 5D just as a pro landscape guy is prolly not running to get the 1dmk3 when it hits. You can also be a pro who just shoots product shots in a studio so you CAN use a smaller camera... it all depends.. hell, you dont even need all "L" lenses.. its up to you, use what you want, how you want ...there are no set rules!

[Jon, The Elder]

It is a blend of the person behind the camera and the gear that they choose to use and the working knowledge of it. This is an age old question/debate.
Here....You decide.
http://www.pbase.com/jpferguson/image/76604250

It's 7:00am the client is asking questions about his costs, not about my equipment.

[mspringfield]

Here....You decide.
http://www.pbase.com/jpferguson/image/76604250

It's 7:00am the client is asking questions about his costs, not about my equipment.

True. There are always people who are concerned about nothing but cost. Those people would never hire someone like me. I probably lose more jobs than I get because of that. I recently had someone call me to shoot a baseball tournament. He proceeded to tell me that I would easily be on the high end of their "pay scale". I stopped him and asked him to define "high end of the pay scale". His response was our scale is $8-15/hr. And said that I would get $15.00. I politely stopped him and explained that for a baseball tournament I get $300.00 a day plus expenses for up to 10 hrs and then it goes on an hourly scale beyond 10 hrs. I was double his budget so needless to say I didn't get the job.

I am not saying that you can't be a professional without "Pro" gear because you can. There are lots of people out there who are doing it. However today with the easy availability of high quality digital camera equipment the "professional" has to do something to separate himself from the pack. Part of that is his or her equipment. A good mechanic can fix your car with the stuff that he picks up at the local Wal-Mart but instead he chooses Snap On or Mac. A good photographer can give you a quality photo with a dRebel but why does he choose a 1 series camera? I think part of it is if you are willing to spend the money for quality professional equipment then it shows a commitment to your craft. I guess its the old "If all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail".

I have many friends who are working pros. They rely on their photography income to pay their mortgage and feed their family. It angers me to see someone come in and undercut them in price just because they have cheaper equipment, less knowledge and most cases less skill. Of course no one thinks of these things.

Michael

[Jay McLaughlin]

Don't confuse my question about gear with one about price. I charge a decent hourly rate for shoots.... off your baseball client's "pay scale" anyway.

[convergent]

I remember when I first had the idea of going pro as a photographer. One of the first photographers I spoke to told me I'd need to get a Medium or Large Format Camera with a digital back if I plan on making any money!

Hahahahahahahaha


Tell him you'd like to see him shoot the NCAA Basketball finals with that setup. For any one to make a blanket statement like that shows their lack of maturity and business sense. A pro by definition is in business to sell images and image products to clients. Whatever you need to get that done to the requirements of the customer, and make the greatest profit... that's what you need.

What if you are in business to sell passport photos... do you really think you need a $25K camera to do that? I don't. And as I pointed out with my initial question about sports, there are many genres of photography that a 400D would outperform that camera for.... action sports, high ISO, etc.

I would concentrate on what the customer wants, and forget what anyone else tells you.

[Jon, The Elder]

I would concentrate on what the customer wants, and forget what anyone else tells you.

Now thats makes absolute sense....and short too.

If you can do it and make a buck....You're a pro.

[Jay McLaughlin]

Exactly my point!

I like my 400D because it's small and light. I move around a lot when I shoot, especially when using a prime lens, so it suits me fine. It's got a 10mp cmos sensor so it's not like I'm shooting small images. Yes in an ideal world it'd be full frame, but to be honest I don't worry about crop factors. I know how I want the shot to look in my head, and compose it accordingly.

[mspringfield]

Don't confuse my question about gear with one about price. I charge a decent hourly rate for shoots.... off your baseball client's "pay scale" anyway.


Jay, You are correct. I apologize for kind of hijacking your OP. I was commenting on another poster's comment on price.

Good for you for charging a decent hourly rate based on my client's pay scale. I have seen $15-20.00 an hour as the average for something like that. My advise to you would be to keep doing what you are doing and use the money you make to upgrade your gear or as I like to call it "supporting your habit". Most of the time it is called "pro" gear because it responds faster, AF, fps, etc. As you upgrade you will see your percentage of keepers increase dramatically. You have the skills to do it and you will only get better with practice. Keep it up.

Again I apologize if I got your thread off track. I get a bit carried away sometimes.. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Michael

[Jay McLaughlin]

We all like a good rant. Made me chuckle as I pictured u sat there red faced with steam coming out of your ears at the thought of people undercutting you!

I can't wait to support my habit some more! I had to buy a bigger kit bag last week because I got tired of working out which stuff I could leave at home because I couldn't fit it all in! I've already got my eye on a new wide angle lens as my next purchase, and I really want a power pack for my studio lights so that I can take them out on location.

[mspringfield]

We all like a good rant. Made me chuckle as I pictured u sat there red faced with steam coming out of your ears at the thought of people undercutting you!

I can't wait to support my habit some more! I had to buy a bigger kit bag last week because I got tired of working out which stuff I could leave at home because I couldn't fit it all in! I've already got my eye on a new wide angle lens as my next purchase, and I really want a power pack for my studio lights so that I can take them out on location.

:lol: That is a pretty good description too. And of course being the quiet, reserved, unopinionated guy that I am I wouldn't say anything. :)

It is a very good way to support your habit as well. That is exactly how I got started. I bought a Nikon D1 with a couple of lenses back in 2000. Started doing some stuff on the side and not I have the stuff you see in my sig. Good luck with it. If I can help you out anytime let me know. A shoot in Scotland would be nice. :)

[zacker]

sure a great photog can make due with lower end equipment but lets face it... great gear is half the battle.. and it makes your life allot easier... and i KNOW its not the gear that does the job, but it does contribute to it in allot of ways!! would you rather shoot a pro sports game with a kit lens or a 400MM L ??

[hooookup]

as a working member of the media, i rely on my 1 series bodies everyday to deliver the goods to my agent. I can put 1000+ clicks on a body in a matter of hours and don't want to worry about limiting myself to clicks on the body because of fear of failure. I use and abuse my equipment day in and day out. It gets knocked around on the red carpets of hollywood by other photogs. they've fallen out of my truck and been negelected.. I wouldn't dare do these kinds of things with a prosumer body.