"You Have a Great Camera!"

This was a big compliment that I just received after posting a few of my wildlife photos on one of my FB groups that I'm a member of. I cringed at first upon receiving the compliment, then knowing that the person meant well, I thanked her for the comment.

Lately, since I'm home bound with lots of free time on hand, I've been going through some of my old photo archives and re-editing them. The following photos for which I received the compliment were taken in 2007 -- with my "great camera," Canon 20D. And I'm not using the quotation marks around the phrase as an expression of snide sarcasm but because the 20D was indeed a great camera -- at the time, that is. For birding and wildlife, it was often paired with the original 100-400L and they brought me much joy. The compliment that I received was spot on.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

It's funny, I returned to photography after a 25 year hiatus and bought a 5D Mk2. Then the GAS set in and it wasn't enough so up the ladder I went. Then, when my wife said, "reduce your inventory" so I could justify new lenses, i went back out to get images with it so I could post them when selling.

I was surprised by what I was seeing from that "inferior" camera. My understanding had grown quite a bit, the camera didn't change.

goalerjones wrote in post #19040587
It's funny, I returned to photography after a 25 year hiatus and bought a 5D Mk2. Then the GAS set in and it wasn't enough so up the ladder I went. Then, when my wife said, "reduce your inventory" so I could justify new lenses, i went back out to get images with it so I could post them when selling.

I was surprised by what I was seeing from that "inferior" camera. My understanding had grown quite a bit, the camera didn't change.

Everything changes but most evident is myself.

Just keep in mind they are trying to compliment the quality of your image, they just don't have the understanding to say it right. You can always respond with something along the lines of "your oven makes great cookies".

Totally understand. My family does this to me all the time. I'll share a really nice image that
took time, patience and processing and the response is, "Must be nice to spend time taking
pictures and have a nice camera and lens."

My response after years of doing the work professionally and dealing with my family,
"It sure is!"

A photographer went to a socialite party in New York.
As he entered the front door, the host said "I love your pictures - they're wonderful; you must have a fantastic camera."
He said nothing until the dinner was finished , then "That was a wonderful dinner; you must have a terrific stove."

Sam Haskins

goalerjones wrote in post #19040587
It's funny, I returned to photography after a 25 year hiatus and bought a 5D Mk2. Then the GAS set in and it wasn't enough so up the ladder I went. Then, when my wife said, "reduce your inventory" so I could justify new lenses, i went back out to get images with it so I could post them when selling.

I was surprised by what I was seeing from that "inferior" camera. My understanding had grown quite a bit, the camera didn't change.

I was given a book on the history of photography while I was laid up after knee surgery: "Photography, the Definitive Visual History" by Tom Ang.
I was intrigued to see the Canon D30 on a double-page spread, highlighted because it was their first APS-C CMOS sensor DSLR to be essentially built from the ground up - previous ones had Kodak internal components, or were tiny. It was introduced in 2000 and caused a massive stir.

I looked up the DPReview site and found two articles reviewing the camera, both of which were highly complementary.
The original review: https://www.dpreview.c​om/reviews/canond30
The throwback review: https://www.dpreview.c​om/articles/63...-canon-eos-d30 - DPR have killed that one!

Recently I found a reference to an article from the Luminous Landscape website, by the respected photographer (the now late) Michael Reichmann. You may be able to view this for one time by going to this site:
https://luminous-landscape.com/d30-vs-film/ After that, if you are not a member it may block most of the article.

In this article he makes an effort to compare the output from the D30 with that of a film camera, using the same lens on both units. While perhaps not having the full academic rigor, his process seems sound and has been backed up by other authoritative sources. I was surprised at the results:

Here is a video with some more of his reflections (and an interesting look back in history at how digital tech was viewed in those days).
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=0LWSV6dlH_U

So, I wondered how much one of these would cost and I picked one up on eBay, never used, for $30US. The reason it was unused was because the otherwise pristine body was scored across the back - apparently an unpacking accident. It had lain in a display case until it was retired. I picked up another body for spares that had a perfect case ($25US) and had Canon pair the two and give it a good clean. They confirmed the original body had no wear at all.

I took it out for a test run with the EF17-40L lens. The following images were taken in dim light, hand-held with very light post processing.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from Tronhard's gallery.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Photo from Tronhard's gallery.

It is certainly an insult to attribute the quality of a photo to the camera.

On the other hand, many of us drool over the next release announcement. We love our gear and do analyze every DR, burst rate and pixel to prove it is better.

As an old boss once said to me (on an entirely different subject), you can't do it with your fingers. We need good gear and it does help the photos. We just don't want our friends to say it was the gear.

I have expressed this same point previously, in somewhat different context, but used in this thread context...

I could be the collector-owner of a great Stradavarius, but if I am not a very good violinist, I could never make it sound nearly s good as its potential!

.
In the first photo, that shallow depth of field that so nicely isolates the ram from the background would not have been achieved with a point and shoot, or with a cell phone camera. . So there are some nice images that the camera is, in part, responsible for the quality of the aesthetics.

These discussions about whether it is the camera or the photographer that is responsible for a quality image usually result in me concluding that it was both the camera and the photographer that are responsible for the quality results. . Of course, when I say, "camera", I mean both the camera and the lens ...... which I suspect is what most people mean when they use the word "camera" in this context.


.

To me, the implication of 'you must have a great camera' is that I have good equipment and I know how to use it well - which is what most people mean if they are being sincere - and that's easy enough to tell from the tone of voice.

I take compliments as meant. Being a princess and parsing the speaker's words beyond their implied meaning is not worth my energy. If it's sarcasm, I reply in kind or walk away.

I do have great cameras as well - all older, used equipment bought for cheap.

Thing is amigo, it is both, but today, it is a lot the camera. With things like eye focus, nailing focus has become rather pedestrian. Let my son take my A7 III out the other night, he was shooting street slinging, the images were unheard of good, and I had him green box it. Stuff came out that would have been nearly impossible 10 years ago. While I get the technical side of photography, he has a great eye for a story. In his case, he is letting the camera decide technically what the image is, and he determines the subject. He is capturing images he has no business capturing based on his "skill".

So while I hate the "you must have a great camera" comments, you do have to give the camera some of its due. You still need to be able to find great content, but for the most part, the camera will do the rest itself.

When people are saying "you must have a great camera", they are implying that it's a great photograph. Better than a poke in the eye with a monopod.