fordmondeo wrote in post #18572371
The bottom line is:
If (insert name) can't take a good picture with a 40d/7d/6d then (insert name) won't take good pictures 6d2.
This post above is one of the more frustrating posts I have read in quite some time. . It makes it seem as if our goal is only to "take a good picture".
Conversely, Team Speed's response, below, is one of the very best posts I've read in quite a while, because it takes into account the fact that many of us are constantly striving to take the very best photos possible.
We care so much about our photos that we are constantly pushing ourselves to improve our results - pushing ourselves as photographers and also pushing our gear to it's limits, which often means upgrading to more capable technology.
TeamSpeed wrote in post #18572461
So when somebody would like to know what the new model of a minivan has going for it from the 5 year old version of the minivan they currently have, and somebody else says "if you can't take a road trip with what you have, then you can't take a road trip with the new one", how exactly is that helpful?
I get a little tired of the sanctimonious reply that if you can't always get good results with what you have now, then newer bodies can't help you. How is that helpful? Sometimes newer tools (body and glass) can indeed make a huge improvement in the results you receive, depending on what you shoot.
- You aren't going to take a good shot of a low light drama event with a a 40D, but can now with a 6D, because AF is now much better in low light and high ISO is quite a bit better.
- You aren't going to shoot a swallow darting around in the air with a 40D and get alot of keepers, but with newer bodies with great AF, your keeper rate will be better, and details in the underside of the bird will be crisper once you push the exposure there a bit afterwards.
- You aren't going to be able to put a 1.4x on a 100-400 and go out to shoot wildlife very well with a 40D in less than sunny conditions, but will with a newer body that has all f8 focusing points, or at least the center.
When I hear people say this, this just sounds like perhaps they shoot things that are very easy and comfortable and don't push themselves to shoot those things that are very challenging. Capabilities like better AF in lower light with better high ISO results with enough resolution to be cropped while still being able to print large can really make a difference, where a newer body may bring these traits to the table over an older one.
I don't intend on sounding harsh, but when somebody wants to compare one tool to another, let's try to answer the question, and not belittle them with "it's not your tools, it's you" responses.
Here is a camera from 5 years ago, compared to a camera now, shooting the same venue, year after year, today's results are better due to the camera, not the photographer.
I quoted all of this because I think it is a wonderful explanation of the photographers needs, and how better gear can better meet those needs.
I took a lot of good pictures with my 50D and my 5D. . I even took a lot of excellent pictures with my 50D and 5D. . But now that I use a 1D4 and a 6D, I can take even more good/excellent pictures.
My goal is to come back from a shoot with as many excellent photos as possible, not just a few excellent photos. . The better cameras that I have upgraded to allow me to take good/excellent photos in conditions where my 50D and 5D would have failed me, so the upgrades have definitely allowed me to accomplish my objectives more than my 50D and 5D allowed me to.
"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".