AndrewChristopher wrote in post #17176441
I was wondering if a higher priced camera takes a sharper, clearer, and smoother photo than a less expensive one? For example, does shooting with a Canon EOS Rebel T3i compared to a Canon EOS 5D Mark III have a dramatic difference in quality or is it the lens that determines this?
The question is, how important is that improvement in sharpness, smoothness, and clarity; to you, as a viewer, how important. Moreover, how much would you actually notice those improvements?
If someone displayed 100 photographs taken by the same photographer, with 50 taken by a Rebel and the other 50 by a 1DX, would you be able to delineate the photos by the camera used?
More importantly, would it even matter if could notice the improved image quality, in that perhaps there were other qualities of the photo that captivated you much more, such as lighting, composition, subject matter, movement, lines, or any combination of such.
What is difficult for some people to grasp is that even factors, such as sharpness, that can be objectively measured are nevertheless received on a subjective level.
As to what is important to you is something that you’ll have to discover on your own. Maybe exacting sharpness will be important to your aesthetic predilections, maybe not.
For me, most any lens made in the past 80 years is sharp enough (at least when stopped down to f/4 or so). I know, my most recent batch of photos was taken with a lens made in 1934.
Where expensive gear often plays a role is in its ability, as folks have said, to say, capture a bird in flight because of the improved AF system, or to endure harsh conditions and heavy usage. These are functions that help expand the field the photography but don’t necessarily improve upon it, at least in terms of creativity and aesthetics.
Again, much of this will fall on your needs, and your needs may change as you pursue the hobby.
All I know is that there are pinhole photos that I enjoy as much (if not more) than any photograph taken with the most expensive DSLR. It’s subjective, but that’s photography—-it’s not like a race that can be measured with a time watch.
As for the importance of the photographer, I say much more on that on the link in my signature.