"hahaha... It's probably some guy with an XTi that thinks he's a pro..." W.T.F.?

[VisualOddity]

I see stuff like this said different places on a frequent basis, and I don't get it.

Now, I understand that there are cameras with MUCH better options, that are sharper, and all around a lot better, but what's wrong with an XT or an XTi (and yes, I know it's entry level)? I always looked at photography as something where the pictures were made by the photog, and the camera was just a tool of the trade. I have seen some AMAZING pictures taken with original Digital Rebel 300D's, and I have seen some crappy ones taken with super high-end $10,000 bodies. So why the lack of love for photog's with not-so-high-end D/SLR's?

I guess when I see these comments, I take it as if the thought is that someone with a lowend DSLR can't be taken serious as a photographer, and it kind of erks me. There are a lot of people out there, including myself, that can't afford to go out and buy a 5D, or a 40D, so we do our best with what we have.

It seems to me that if your customer base is comsumer, not commercial, in most cases these bodies would be fine if the photog knows what they are doing.

I guess I am just curious what everyone else thinks? Do all you guys think that some guy w/ an XTi can't be taken seriously based on gear alone?


:dunno:

[SKnight]

I'm involved in motorcycles and astronomy among other things, something I find to be universal among hobbies where a select few make the pro level, is that there are always gear snobs that love to rag on those that can't afford to keep up. Funny thing about that, usually those that do such can't accomplish half what someone with non store bought talent and a little determination can do.

Dollar signs on their equipment is salve for their pitiful egos, I don't care what the hobby is.

[Capt Rick]

I have seen some guys with the best tools money can buy,,,,,,,and cant use them properly.
A spray gun is a good example.
,,,,,yeah,,sometimes ego's have a little to do with it.

[Mark1]

I was just explaining this to my co-worker last night. I boiled it down to... The XT's (what he has)are fine and make great pictures. But the upper level bodies provide more opertunity for more shots. Wether it is becouse of a faster FPS, better low light response, wider dynamic range, or finer resolution.

Some pros use the XTi. Depending on the known final output. It may be pointless to use anything better. I shoot some for webmasters. If I know the image is going to end up being a 1 inch square in a monitor, Do I really heed a Mk3DS to capture the image?

[Jim G]

I've seen many rubbish shots from pro bodies and many, many stunning images come out of the consumer line of cameras. Skill rules all.

Having said that, it can be a bit off-putting for some customers if they themselves use the same camera or a higher-end camera... not everyone understands the above point :p