what person would still work with a canon digital rebel?

Karl Johnston wrote in post #8198231
This guy has some kick-butt nature photography made with a 10D
Vozen

2000$ made on this picture and presented in the main hallway of a college:
Determination Of The Crew

and it was made with one of these!:
canon powershot sx100

My .02/3 of a cent; its the photog, not the gear.

Of course it is the photographer but good gear gets in the way, less.

There are always exceptions which you have posted. They are exceptions, not the rule.

Atlandis wrote in post #8219056
when 450 drops a bit.. I am about to get 1 or 2 for m every day things... and save my other babys for me. I've seen photographer " company who gets jobs like advert for a store.." snaping with compact ones.. 450 is a jewel with nice glass and nice flash

all photographers do their heavy duty job with cheap models because they loose lots of interest if they use their babys.. except if its an agency or HUGE work with good money, only then I may used my very good stuff.. right now I use my 40d and eos-5 ,but looking at the market every day.. I believe I have to downgrade a bit as I still loose a bit of interest versus others a 450 will be great! ... the every day market and not the HIGH super wow fashion and bolywood.. hehe stuff is not the reality.. if the market and the demand stays behind, the need to upgrade and use of new technologys.. stays behind as well. I love tech and new stuff, but for me..

I hope they will do something about photographers instead so nobody can get a job for 50bucks any kind of result.. and true photographers loose interest and customers because of it.. thats a better topic to discuss I believe because this topic.. have to do with this matter...
I am young btw 29, so no rush..

Have you been drinking? Sorry, but I really don't understand anything you said. Anyway; it would turn me off initially to see someone with a rebel shooting my wedding, and if all they had to shoot with was the 18-55, I would definitely turn them down, but the rebel bodies are capable of great results in the right hands. A photographer who is using a rebel because it is dumbed down to a point they can understand and a photographer using a rebel because it fits their hands better for a 10 hour day of shooting are two entirely different people.

The only thing you have to do then is a good reasearch before u get married, see their work and ask for their system.. It is simple. But good system and good work, means lots of bucks.. sorry if you couldnt get my point..

Losing interest because the market is not watching result but price instead.. and the job takes who ever makes the best price. (no matter about the result).

a small example. I made an offer for 250 products studio photography a price between 300-400 including vat, but I lost the job because a guy with a compact camera made a better offer. 50 euro hahaha

I hope now you understand my point. (thats an example)

And thats my point of downgrading than upgrading instead.

mrbigisbudgood wrote in post #8183859
"Point and Shoot" Kodak DX7590 in manual mode when I was still learning........

It's not always about the equipment. Don't judge.

have you figured out straight horizons yet ?

ed rader

bluefox9er wrote in post #8188291
If the couple are satisfied with the pictures, then thats all that matters. I *really* don't think that the couple will say to the caterers after the wedding " wow, the food was delicious, what sort of pots and pans did you use to cook it in"

but that said, if I saw a *pro* wedding shooter with the very basic canon camera and lenses, i would think that either his work is so incredibly outstanding and has quality of biblical proportions, or the photographer has absloutley no idea. one extreme or another, im afraid.

yeah but there is no way to know if you're satisfied till after the fact....and there ain't no retakes .

i'm a tradesman and i do look at the gear you use and what you drive and all that when forming that first impression which usually has a lot of weight in final selection .

ed rader

I didn't take the time to read the conversations throughout this thread except for the first post. I had a 20d and a 30d with L glass ect. ect. I got into a tough spot and sold it all. Now I borrow a 300d to shoot with. I have . Want to know why? I am not pre-occupied with having pro equitment when htaken better pictures with the rebel and a 17-55 then I ever have with more expensive gearaving pro equitment doesn't make you a pro.

I do realize my spelling is a tad off. Sorry.

That makes you a fair and good pro ed rader. But what I wrote before it’s not for the whole world.. Eastern countries do work and think differently.

No, pro equipment doesn't make you a pro, but feeling an obligation to your customers to keep up with good equipment that will improve their final product is a huge step in making you a pro.

griptape wrote in post #8219301
No, pro equipment doesn't make you a pro, but feeling an obligation to your customers to keep up with good equipment that will improve their final product is a huge step in making you a pro.

true. if you are using a 300d to shoot weddings something's wrong unless it's your third back-up and your other two cameras have failed .

ed rader

Atlandis wrote in post #8219288
That makes you a fair and good pro ed rader. But what I wrote before it’s not for the whole world.. Eastern countries do work and think differently.

i'll second what Bohdank said above: "i have no idea what you are talking about" .

ed rader

I would presonally rather have someone shoot my wedding with a 10d and stock glass if they understand lighting, than someone with a 5dmii and 24-70 who just loves, "The Green Square". Not saying all with 5dmii's are just amatures with a big budget. Not at all. Just saying.

shayneyasinski wrote in post #8182953
any of you guys scratch your head when you meet a photog shooting with old gear and no idea what raw is??

Is this a joke? I personally know a few photographers who can produce a far better quality image with their 25+ year old cameras then most shooting today with brand new gear. Why do new photographers always think they need the latest and greatest to produce quality photos?

michaelbehlen wrote in post #8219554
I would presonally rather have someone shoot my wedding with a 10d and stock glass if they understand lighting, than someone with a 5dmii and 24-70 who just loves, "The Green Square". Not saying all with 5dmii's are just amatures with a big budget. Not at all. Just saying.

so would i but how would you know that? who would you scrutinize harder the guy with the 300d and kit lens or the fella with the 5d and L lens?

let's forget about "pro gear" for a minute. you don't need a 1d body or even L lenses to shoot a wedding when a 40d and 17-55 IS will produce "pro" results.

cameras like the 300d are abysmal at ISOs above 400 and any pro who's current with the craft and is trying to get the best results for the client and in fact himself just wouldn't be handicapping himself with such an old camera.

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #8219642
cameras like the 300d are abysmal at ISOs above 400 and any pro who's current with the craft and is trying to get the best results for the client and in fact himself just wouldn't be handicapping himself with such an old camera.

ed rader

Exactly. Composition and timing is a huge part of what makes a photograph great. But technology plays a huge part too at this point when the customer wants a detailed, clean image at 8x10 or bigger, and knows it can be done because they've seen their friends' albums. Yes, older cameras can produce great results, but the reason we upgrade is that they produce GREATER results in tougher lighting conditions. Which is the same reason we upgrade from point and shoots.

here is a pic from the said photographer