Interesting article, Brad. I keep telling my daughter that it's not necessarily the camera, but how well you know what you have. That said, I've been in her situation trying desperately to squeeze a shot from a camera that won't DO what I want it too.
Great article and does stand true 90% of the shot is in the eye of the artists. However when it comes to needing to technically push the limites in most cases the $200 camera is going to hit it's limits quickly. Also deciding where you want to do post image work. The $200 camera in most cases will force you to do a lot of pre-imaging work during the shot, while a $2000 systems lets you get quick processing RAW images that allow for WAY more flexibility in post image work.
Bottom line in my out experinece is if you have not plans to sell or publish your work, stick to the $200 system. I shoot with a $200 system when taking day/day images for just family and friends. When I know I want to publish I break out the $2000+++ system.
almost all of the shots i have taken on here have been with my point and shoot or my phone, mainly to prove a point that it does not require an expensive camera to take a photo.
I started out with the 100+ and hits limitations and upgraded to a 300+. The 300+ served me well until I was hitting its limitations, too which is why I upgraded to my Nikon D5000. It is still not 2000+ but when I compare the image quality from 2 years ago to now, it is a major difference I can see. I know it is not the equipment that makes the photographer and my skill has improved many times more than my camera but having the right camera for what you are doing makes a big difference. Trying to squeeze decent macros out of a point and shoot is possible but it is not easy.
I agree with the basic sentiment of this piece -- I've gotten that "your camera takes great pictures" compliment before and it drives me mad. The equipment is definitely important but it's easy to give it too much focus and forget about the fundamentals like composition, line, etc.
So says the girl that just bought a new lens! Hehehe
I would agree with the basic premise: Skill is more important than equipment. I would rather view the work of a great photographer on mediocre equipment than the reverse.
That said, the gentleman set up a shot both cameras would succeed at. I shoot with a Canon G12 pocket camera and a Canon 1D Mark II. Despite the hardware and software being 6 years older, and 2 mega-pixels less, the 1D can do things the G12 simply cannot. And has better image quality. Does it matter? Rather depends on what your end product will be and what subject matter you are shooting.
So agree with previous comment and that photograhy is such a balance of art and technology. As a bit of a technophobe and a lazy lady, I rather feel an expensive camera would be wasted on me,but I would'nt mind the chance to find out!
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Bottom line in my out experinece is if you have not plans to sell or publish your work, stick to the $200 system. I shoot with a $200 system when taking day/day images for just family and friends. When I know I want to publish I break out the $2000+++ system.
So says the girl that just bought a new lens! Hehehe
That said, the gentleman set up a shot both cameras would succeed at. I shoot with a Canon G12 pocket camera and a Canon 1D Mark II. Despite the hardware and software being 6 years older, and 2 mega-pixels less, the 1D can do things the G12 simply cannot. And has better image quality. Does it matter? Rather depends on what your end product will be and what subject matter you are shooting.