So is equipment really a big factor?

I don't see why one has to exclude the other (e.g. learning vs good gear)?

My ability to (learn to) see has nothing to do with what camera model I'm using.

My will to learn and the amount of joy and motivation I have for learning can however be killed by bad tools.

You don't have to. I wouldn't suggest a 1DsmkIII to a beginner even a rich one. My advice to all beginners is what I've stated here. Learn to see light first. Then get the expensive gear. Learn who you are as a photographer to see what gear fits your needs best. If your curious about say the 1DsmkIII go rent one. Cheaper than dropping 8 large to find out your blind and have no talent but you've got one heck of a necklace.

Yes, gear matters. But skill matters more.

Look at it this way. Heifetz could make a cheap fiddle sing, but could bring strong men to tears with a Stradivarius.

I can only make rude noises with either. The quality of the Strad does me no good at all.

It is the same with cameras. A truly good photographer can get excellent results from a cheap camera, but can produce amazing works of art with a good one. A bad photographer can do neither.

The trick is to make yourself a good photographer. Most beginners start with less-expensive gear, and increase the quality of their gear as the quality of their skills increases.

But by all means, if your budget allows it, start with a Hasselblad! But giving a Hasselblad to a rank amateur does not automatically produce primo photographs

20droger wrote in post #5652659
Yes, gear matters. But skill matters more.

Look at it this way. Heifetz could make a cheap fiddle sing, but could bring strong men to tears with a Stradivarius.

I can only make rude noises with either. The quality of the Strad does me no good at all.

It is the same with cameras. A truly good photographer can get excellent results from a cheap camera, but can produce amazing works of art with a good one. A bad photographer can do neither.

The trick is to make yourself a good photographer. Most beginners start with less-expensive gear, and increase the quality of their gear as the quality of their skills increases.

But by all means, if your budget allows it, start with a Hasselblad! But giving a Hasselblad to a rank amateur does not automatically produce primo photographs

And you wouldn't see a blad in the hands of a sports guy (out of the studio) on the sidelines either. Proper tool for the job but ya gotta learn which tool is best for which situation. In most college photography programs theres a reason why they start you with manual cameras and film.

If we are talking about the learning segment of anything;

Learning moves more quickly if we are having fun. Children have fun by seeing their pictures on a cameraphone and the whole thing progresses to camera LCD to monitor to print.
At each stage of development of our work we become more critical of it, but we must continue to have fun.

If that student thinks that he needs better quality gear, as long as he continues to grow, who are we to deny him that?
Could it be that we believe that our way is the "best" way, the "Holy Grail" of learning, the "my way or the highway" mentality?

Giving guidance, which is a good thing, is one thing, but being critical about what equipment he chooses to buy is something else.
It's his money, let him spend it as he wants.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5649525
If you can't see and/or don't understand light...

Learn light and how to see it and to see in general...

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5652061
Learn to see and learn light before you invest in gear.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5652372
Ya gotta start somewhere and learning light is the best place to start.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5652478
Light and the ability to see is something every good photographer can do.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #5652478
Learn to see light first.

Are you going to explain WTF you mean by this is just keep regurgitating the same cliches hoping someone will take it seriously? Everyone "sees light", what is it you're trying to say? Honest question.

Well, if you think capturing the light is hard, try capturing the dark.

iamaelephant wrote in post #5652722
Are you going to explain WTF you mean by this is just keep regurgitating the same cliches hoping someone will take it seriously? Everyone "sees light", what is it you're trying to say? Honest question.

Decafe and back away from the keyboard.

No everyone doesn't see light in photographic terms. And theres allot of photographers out there that have NO understanding of light and the qualities of light. When to shoot and what to shoot in what light. Why would something be better in soft light as apposed to hard light and vise versa.

And then how to put the image together when they finally see it. Seeing is being able to recognize a photograph before you snap the shutter and light/quality of light is the base of it all. Light and knowing it and shooting in the perfect light for the subject is what its all about. Great photographs have all one thing in common LIGHT....

All this talk of a good photographer with a good camera vs the same photog with a ****ty camera reminds me of a book I just bought.

Annie Leibovitz, "A Photographer's life" 1990-2005

It is sprinkled with stunning images taken with obvious technical skill but it is also laced with soft, out of focus, motion blurred images. One thing is constant in all the photos though, emotion! It's obvious she can use the best cameras around to capture super sharp images with amazing detail and colour but then she chooses to use lesser equipment for other purposes. It's obvious she is not fixated on sharpness or speed and she is still considered one of the best.

That's a great shot but what comes to mind first when I look at it is, Makeup and lighting. A good MUA can save you a couple steps in Post and good lighting is just that. ( ok, maybe that wasn't the very first thing )

A professional photographer with lots of skill and makes a good living off his/her work can and will buy the best equipment that they have a need for.

it also depends on what you shoot I think. There are LOTS of wedding photographers sporting 40Ds and D200s. Having the 1.6x (and whatever Nikon is) crop factor may be to their advantage regarding lenses. They don't make a 28-80 f/2.8 IS or 110-320mm f/2.8 IS for FF camera (rough equivilant to 17-55 and 70-200).

As I move up I'd like to eventually get a 30D/40D for enhanced ISO performance and spot metering. I don't need a 1DM3 to take 10fps, I don't even use 3fps! LOL

I have seen great images come from an XT and the MArk 3. But you will see more from the pro bodies simply because the people who (generally) use the pro bodies have invested a lot of time and effort into the art of photography, and therefore know how to work the non-camera-body part of the image.... the lighting, costumes, makeup, etc...
I recall very clearly something said by Chase Jarvis.
http://www.viddler.com …re/chasejarvis/​videos/17/
Basically, he wished he had immediately invested in the best equipment he could possibly have gotten. Of course, he is focused and motivated, and knew he wanted to do this for a living.

There have been comparisons between the 40D and the 5D, and often the difference has been shown to be smaller than one would expect.

Yes, I believe the differences can be exploited in the hands of a gifted photographer, but I believe the greatest difference is between photographers and different processing.

As for the "discussion" on seeing the light, quite frankly there are too many of us that can't see it, don't understand this, and likely never will.

There are also people that will never be artistic or creative. That's the truth folks - we're not all gifted musicians/artists just because some no talent cluck makes it big on "xxxx Idol". Some of us are just fortunate to become competent technicians.

while seeing light is critically important...so is having gear thats capable of capturing it.
image processing and metering capabilities obviously increase as camera model numbers decrease.

the key to becoming a better/good/great photographer is quite simple:

NUMBER 1 - read, study and learn as much as you can about the craft. then when your done........read, study and learn some more

number 2 - buy the best equipment that you can reasonably afford.

number 3 - take lots and lots of pictures

number 4 - read, study and learn

However...

A great photographer will achieve better imagery with cheap equipment than an incompetent photographer will using the very best gear.

However, match two photographers of equal skills and the one with the better gear will come out the winner.

AND... as an instructor at Brooks Institute of photography told my friend manyyears ago when he wanted to substitute a twin lens Mamiyaflex for the required Hasselblad setup,

"Michaelangelo did not paint the Cistine Chapel ceiling with a paint by numbers set!"