Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 25 Sep 2014 (Thursday) 03:21
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Does higher price mean better quality photo?

 
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Sep 27, 2014 10:34 |  #61
bannedPermanent ban

davidc502 wrote in post #17180229 (external link)
As a Golfer, I completely agree with the analogy. Tiger Woods is going to kick my a$$ with a cheap set of clubs no matter the set I have. Put the best set of clubs in Tigers hands and it's going to enhance his game because he knows how to utilize them. Put the best set in a amateur's hands and there's little change in what he can produce.

The same will hold true in just about any other industry.

Again, I ask are people that give out such advice and shoot with more than an entry system...do you consider yourself an accomplished photographer like Tiger is in his profession. If not, why are you not still shooting an entry level system?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
WhidbeyHiker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,928 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2968
Joined Dec 2013
     
Sep 27, 2014 10:41 |  #62

Hogloff wrote in post #17180334 (external link)
Again, I ask are people that give out such advice and shoot with more than an entry system...do you consider yourself an accomplished photographer like Tiger is in his profession. If not, why are you not still shooting an entry level system?


Money, other commitments? Tiger may be able to kick our butts with walmart golf clubs but can he kick Mcllroy's

Some of these questions answer themselves if you think about it. Lance Armstrong can beat me on a huffy, even when I'm riding my $2500 Ultegra equipped Surly but that doesn't mean I'm going to sell my Surly and buy a huffy. Perhaps lance was a bad example....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hennie
Goldmember
1,259 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Spijkenisse, The Netherlands
     
Sep 27, 2014 11:20 |  #63

Results do not only depend on quality of body,lens and operator.
Better gear will only benefit if shooting circumstances would show the limits of "lesser" gear.
Better gear will feel better, like driving a more luxurious car.
What would you benefit from capability to shoot at ISO 10**6 when there is nice and sufficient natural light available?
What would you benefit from a 1.2 lens when shooting landscapes at F/11?
What would you benefit from 10 FPS when shooting architecure?
Pick the gear you can afford and only upgrade when it is worn out or seriously limits your ability to take the shot you want.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 162
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Sep 27, 2014 11:23 |  #64

hennie wrote in post #17180395 (external link)
.....
What would you benefit from a 1.2 lens when shooting landscapes at F/11?
.....

A faster lens makes for a brighter viewfinder.

A faster lens would also be beneficial for autofocus when photographing darker scenes.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hennie
Goldmember
1,259 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Spijkenisse, The Netherlands
     
Sep 27, 2014 11:24 |  #65

WhidbeyHiker wrote in post #17180343 (external link)
Money, other commitments? Tiger may be able to kick our butts with walmart golf clubs but can he kick Mcllroy's

Some of these questions answer themselves if you think about it. Lance Armstrong can beat me on a huffy, even when I'm riding my $2500 Ultegra equipped Surly but that doesn't mean I'm going to sell my Surly and buy a huffy. Perhaps lance was a bad example....

You probably will never play against tiger and lance was beaten by the doping he used, not by another cyclist (analogy with photoshop?) so his gear cannot be blamed.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hennie
Goldmember
1,259 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Spijkenisse, The Netherlands
     
Sep 27, 2014 11:31 |  #66

SkipD wrote in post #17180405 (external link)
A faster lens makes for a brighter viewfinder.

A faster lens would also be beneficial for autofocus when photographing darker scenes.

Point taken, but you will not allways need a brighter viewfinder
or shoot dark scenes at F/11 and need autofocus.

So surely better but not allways needed.

Good might be good enough.
Better is the worst enemy of good.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blackgold59
Member
154 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 60
Joined Feb 2013
     
Sep 27, 2014 14:23 |  #67

AndrewChristopher wrote in post #17176441 (external link)
Hello all,

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?

By far not the best to answer this, but figured I'd offer my opinion from my own experience.

I honestly think there are many things that come into play when one only speaks of, sharper, clearer and smoother images. I don't think I could say that a camera alone will do all this, there has to be a bit of know how behind the camera and lens no matter what camera one runs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Azathoth
" ...whose name no lips dare speak aloud"
Avatar
1,521 posts
Gallery: 692 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 4715
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Funchal
     
Sep 27, 2014 18:29 |  #68

SkipD wrote in post #17180405 (external link)
A faster lens makes for a brighter viewfinder.

A faster lens would also be beneficial for autofocus when photographing darker scenes.

None of that are important for landscape shooting. A tripod, liveview and manual focus. That's how it's done.


500px (external link) | flickr (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Instagram (external link) | Blue Jimny Madeira (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,881 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2005
     
Sep 27, 2014 20:23 as a reply to  @ post 17179372 |  #69

This general question has been addressed by the Hong Kong-based YouTube channel DigitalRev TV. Their "Pro Photographer, Cheap Camera (external link)" series takes the concept beyond forum arguments and challenges actual working photographers to use more prosaic and pedestrian equipment. A glance at those videos might provide some enlightenment.

From a more personal standpoint, I've provided digital images to a good number of publications over the last 18 years, located from the U.S., U.K., Canada and Japan using cameras ranging from a Nikon Coolpix 900s  (external link)(which was the first truly capable pont-and-shoot digicam from 1998) through several Canon DSLR's such as the D30, 300D, XTi, T2i and 60D. None of the images have ever been rejected for technical reasons, even though the publishers have been demanding of image quality and especially for meeting deadlines.

One of the most interesting outcomes during that time came when I submitted a crowd image from a Fujifiljm S7000 (external link). That image was taken from a moving escalator under uncontrolled conditions, but something must have gone right. The magazine printed it "full bleed" - printing terminology for border to border across the entire width of an oversized page.

From what I've experienced, ever since Canon released their first DSLR, the D30  (external link)in 2000,any Canon DSLR has been capable of generating publication-quality images. When I had to retire my D30 after a couple of years' overuse, I switched to an original Digital Rebel 300D (external link), never looked back and never heard a word of complaint from anyone.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Sep 28, 2014 06:15 |  #70
bannedPermanent ban

DC Fan wrote in post #17181116 (external link)
This general question has been addressed by the Hong Kong-based YouTube channel DigitalRev TV. Their "Pro Photographer, Cheap Camera (external link)" series takes the concept beyond forum arguments and challenges actual working photographers to use more prosaic and pedestrian equipment. A glance at those videos might provide some enlightenment.

From a more personal standpoint, I've provided digital images to a good number of publications over the last 18 years, located from the U.S., U.K., Canada and Japan using cameras ranging from a Nikon Coolpix 900s  (external link)(which was the first truly capable pont-and-shoot digicam from 1998) through several Canon DSLR's such as the D30, 300D, XTi, T2i and 60D. None of the images have ever been rejected for technical reasons, even though the publishers have been demanding of image quality and especially for meeting deadlines.

One of the most interesting outcomes during that time came when I submitted a crowd image from a Fujifiljm S7000 (external link). That image was taken from a moving escalator under uncontrolled conditions, but something must have gone right. The magazine printed it "full bleed" - printing terminology for border to border across the entire width of an oversized page.

From what I've experienced, ever since Canon released their first DSLR, the D30  (external link)in 2000,any Canon DSLR has been capable of generating publication-quality images. When I had to retire my D30 after a couple of years' overuse, I switched to an original Digital Rebel 300D (external link), never looked back and never heard a word of complaint from anyone.

Most stock agencies have much higher minimum standards than what can be achieved using a P&S or rebel line of cameras. In fact many companies looking for publication images for full spread ads also have much higher standards. I personally would not count on entry level cameras if I was entertaining selling my images...you can be severely limiting your market.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
whiteflyer
Goldmember
Avatar
1,810 posts
Gallery: 273 photos
Likes: 1420
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Lancashire, England
     
Sep 28, 2014 08:39 |  #71

Does a FF 1Dx take a better landscape/studio shot than a FF 6D. NO

Can a 1Dx get a fast moving target easier than a 6D. YES

Horses for courses, but better glasses will improve BOTH cameras


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 220
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
     
Oct 01, 2014 01:21 |  #72

The real core of the question is are there aspects with the lower priced gear that result in a disadvantage.

My experience:
While the T4i is a very capable crop camera, I was increasingly unhappy with the ISO part 1600+
Each photo had to be corrected individually and that was inconvenient.
With my 6D I get better high ISO performance with less noise, and I get a thinner DOF from my primes.
Therefore I see the benefits in my purchase of the more expensive gear. Aspects that T4i cannot achieve.
For my needs, the 6D is superior, but as a walk around (f4.0) or a landscape (f8/0) camera these two may have almost no real world differences in their final photos.


James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Miki ­ G
Goldmember
1,157 posts
Likes: 301
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Ireland
     
Oct 01, 2014 03:00 |  #73

I think it really depends on what you shoot and your camera's capabilities at capturing it successfully. More expensive cameras usually offer more flexibility, which help in more challenging situations. This also normally applies to the more expensive lenses & the sensor in the more expensive camera may offer better dynamic range and resolution.

As for whether the expensive gear will give you better results will depend on how you use it.
A blurry out of focus shot from a 1dx looks the same as a blurry out of focus shot from a rebel.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Levina ­ de ­ Ruijter
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,385 posts
Gallery: 350 photos
Best ofs: 10
Likes: 9394
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, EU
     
Oct 01, 2014 06:20 |  #74

Phoenixkh wrote in post #17178450 (external link)
Some genres of photography require better equipment to get the best chance of taking engaging photographs. For those genres, the simple answer is "yes".

One such example? Wildlife photography. There is a thread here that shows people's "then and now" photographs. I can't seem to find it at the moment, though I did several searches. One of the main things I noticed is the equipment being used when someone started out capturing bird photographs and what equipment they were using for their "now" photographs.

I'm sure these same people were working on their skills in parallel with their gear upgrades. I don't thing it's an "either/or" question. Better equipment "may" lead to better photographs. As I mentioned above, in some genres of photography, less expensive equipment will be definitely limit the possibilities.

The thread you are referring to is this one I think: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1160211

I posted a few images in that thread (I moved from flickr to ipernity so the links are all broken. I'm fixing them now - need to find the "then" shots again in my collection as I didn't move them to my new photo host!).

I started with a 40D and the Tamron 55-200mm. After a year and a half I was making images that I thought were the best I could get with that combination and I felt I was ready for L-glass. I bought the 300/4 and a year later the 400/5.6. A year or so later I bought a 5Dc and then a 1D II N.

I bought different cameras because I was looking for the kind of image quality that I saw in the images of the really good bird photographers and that I was not getting. So I thought it was the gear. It took a long time for me to figure out what it was I was seeing and not getting myself. It was quality of light and closeness to the subject. The realisation of that changed everything for me.

So in my view quality of light is the most important thing. And for bird photography closeness to the subject is a close second. Gear is secondary.

Of course, better gear does help get the shot when shooting birds, because a fast shutter without lag helps. A bigger buffer helps. 10 fps can make the difference when there's action and you get the one perfect shot in a burst that you wouldn't have made with just 4 fps. So yes, better, more expensive gear helps. But it won't make you a better photographer, it won't magically give you better images. You have to do that all by yourself.


I'm a bloody goody two-shoes!
My flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phoenixkh
a mere speck
6,843 posts
Gallery: 67 photos
Likes: 1455
Joined May 2011
Location: Gainesville, Florida
     
Oct 01, 2014 10:05 |  #75

Levina,

I couldn't agree more. I appreciate your post. These discussions are difficult online because it takes a while for the give and take to show up. I continue to work on my approach both to the technical side and to the subject (pun intended).

When I decided to get a DSLR, I got a 60D with just one lens, the 15-85. We started going out to more places and I fell in love with bird photography. The 15-85 isn't a very effective lens for this endeavor. I added the 70-300L not long thereafter. It opened up a new world to me.

In discussions like these, it becomes apparent to me that many people think it's "either/or"... black and white, etc. I can tell that isn't the case with you because you mentioned the new equipment as well. Without a telephoto lens, I wouldn't even be able to develop my own skills, but as you stated, without the personal improvement, my photographs would be forgettable.

Some of the "getting closer" advice is harder for me to do, though I do agree with it in principle. We frequent many nature preserves around here and in many cases, you would have to brave swamps to get closer and I'm not that adventurous. We often see gators right along the paths we walk and just the other day, one walked across the path, right behind us, as we were set up to photograph a resident Great Blue Heron.

Light? That is another matter completely. I am with you: I don't think we can underestimate the effect good light has on our photography. After all, a photograph is really just captured light.

Btw, thanks for posting the link. That was the one to which I was referring.


Kim (the male variety) Canon 1DX2 | 1D IV | 16-35 f/4 IS | 24-105 f/4 IS | 100L IS macro | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 100-400Lii | 50 f/1.8 STM | Canon 1.4X III
RRS tripod and monopod | 580EXII | Cinch 1 & Loop 3 Special Edition | Editing Encouraged

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

11,364 views & 0 likes for this thread
Does higher price mean better quality photo?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Mannyromano123
728 guests, 291 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.