I promise I'll cease my hijacking of this thread here and now...But it's too funny. I just logged on to facebook and I've got Borrowlenses.com on my friends list. Their post linked here:
By Glort: Just the same, If I give some non shooter the best gear going, I still expect to get better pics with a rabble and a kit lens than they will.
To me, that is the proof in the pudding answer to the question.
Well you guys wanna hear a confession? I started with a Rebel XT it seems like forever ago. I have since donated it to my 9 yar old daughter's never ending new photography obsession... so it is still around. Every now and then I pick it up and I can REALLY tell a difference in quality and color rendering. That isn't to say that I didn't get some really great photos with that camera back in the day... Some of my favorites (even now) were made with that thing. But that doesn't mean that I don't need and love my pair of 5D IIs.
The other thing about using less than the greatest gear is that you REALLY GOTTA NAIL IT in camera. It just isn't as forgiving. And not only that, it is way more restricting in the conditions that you can nail things.
Shot with Rebel XT and the 28-135:
And this wedding I ended up using the Rebel XT (it was backup at that point) and it was fine and dandy.
Since going to your 5d's, how many clients have commented on the TECHNICAL quality over and above any similar amount of comments you got with the rebel?
There is one point I would concede with the better gear and that is I can see how it would make a lot of shooters who were lacking in confidence feel better about their abilities and that may in fact lead to them doing things they would not have tried before.
I guess if having what people think is the right gear works as a crutch to help them go from walking to running, then there is something to be said for it.
The placebo effect can be used with good success in medicine, guess there is no reason it can't work in photography as well.
it's not that the shots get better technically though it can..it has a lot to do with keeper rates and getting shots that you can't get before. Now tell me how can a client comment on the technical quality of a shot or comment at all if noise was so bad that you culled it? cmon folks..we all like to think that camera/equipment doesn't matter but it does. Also there is issue here with standard of equipment that we are talking about here. Tenoverthnose may not have the state of the art equipment but I bet he has good quality lens, cameras, and enough flashes so as to not hinder his imagination. He has what he needs to do what he wants. Take away all his flashes and leave him with a rebel and kit lens. He may still come up with good stuff..but different.. and not what he might have imagined and probably overall not as good when you consider the whole set.
I think there is a good chance that most of us are on pretty much the same page.. I keep hearing us say the same thing with different words.
So, am I a better photographer now than when I relied on my XT? Oh, yeah. And I sure can do more with my XT now than I could then.
I imagine, if you gave a rookie a 5DII, their photos might get worse rather than better compared to the photos with their trusty point and shoot... no onboard flash... etc...
Technology increases in quality.... I hope to increase BOTH my skills and my gear to keep up with it. But the the most important or limiting factor (depending on who you are, lol) is behind the viewfinder. Just think... if digital photography equipment jumps in quality as much as it did in the last 10 years... holy cow!
Oh and you'll only take my 5Ds when you pry them out of my cold dead fingers... OR when I can't live without the next model, whichever comes first.
Everyone has opinions...that's what the OP asked. Some say equipment matters BUT the one using it is much more important. I've shot weddings with a Canon AE-1 (not program) and a 50mm and 70-210. Did I get as many great shots as if I had the equipment available today....no, of course not. Film vs. digital...no brainer.
But with the advent of digital, better yet, a modicum of decent image quality, all the way from a "Rebel" to a MKIII it really depends on the skill, knowledge and eye of the photographer. We're all saying the same things. Know your gear, upgrade for your style and how those upgrades will benefit your abilities is all game.
Heck, this shot was with an XTI and a kit lens of all things
I don't do any pro photography for hire at all like you guys do, but this is just my weird view on things like this in general.
Your selling stuff... your skill at capturing images that preserve memories in a way that "Uncle Frank" can't even come close to doing no matter what equipment he has. It's the eye that is attached to your brain that you are selling, not the camera that is attached to your hand. Equipment may limit but it does not enable.
Your selling stuff... if your customer, the bride, thinks an equipment list is important then it's important, period. You should have a list ready to go, only if asked of course. You should have a short story (elevator pitch) ready to go too, "I have a backup 'cause stuff happens. I have a fast lens to catch candid moments, I've enough spare batteries to do 5 weddings, just in case". Whatever, just short, less than 30 sec. clean and crisp. If you have a lot of equipment include the value "I have $20,000" worth of the latest equipment..." it shows you are financially committed to you business. If you think most of your competition has more equipment than you don't mention it.
If a competing 'tog doesn't have a list ready to go, you get more points. If the competing 'tog has a list but can't explain it, you get a lot more points. If the competing 'tog lectures the bride that it's not important you get a ton more points.
When bridal mags tell brides to ask for equipment lists, not matter how unrelated to reality the question is, the are just giving you another way to distinguish yourself from the competition and another facet you can use to market yourself. After all you are selling stuff.
Here's her un-edited proof gallery http://www.madisonsquared.com/proofing/kleinpeterwedding (They're dark and flat, I promise I edited the keepers her mom bought) Shot 97 actually shows when pro photog and I clicked at the same time, I kinda liked what it did to her dress. Shot 117 is the hired pro, so you can scope out his gear, too - ignore the WalMart sticker, he's a pretty well-known local photographer.
Just for comparison reasons, here's the shot that he took that is now her Facebook picture: I'm not sure what he was thinking with that flash, I do know that he bounced at least some of it off the VERY high ceilings from his flash he had stationed in the balcony.
Keep in mind that I wasn't the hired pro, so during ceremony, I had to stay out of his way (even though she granted me a front row seat).
*Go easy, these aren't posted for C&C for a reason, I've come a LONG way since I did these.
Nice shots...and if you got them in RAW...easily doctored in post processing. Good work. I've been to weddings where I didn't want to interfere with the hired photog...You can only get a limited number of good shots...otherwise the pro starts wondering if you are horning in on his post wedding sales. And, rightfully so. I've seen contracts where the hired pro won't allow anyone to photograph the wedding with pro gear.
Commentary on showing up at weddings with Digital DSLR's...
Everyone talks about uncle Bob and Aunt Bessie with their DSLR's as if they were bimbos...well, some of those Uncle Bobs and Aunt Bessies are decent amateur photographers with a lot of post processing expertise. So, being wary of wedding party/guests with DSLR's is warranted in my opinion. No one wants one of the guests to run home...whip out 40 or 50 images post processed in CS4 and email them to the bride before she has a chance to look at the pros stuff...and I think that's why a lot of photographers have gone to the whole fee up front...including the price of the wedding images. Then, Uncles and Aunties with DSLR's don't really matter much.
Frankly...what separates a lot of the pros from DSLR snap shooters is post processing...shooting in RAW and then nailing the image in post...using the tricks of the trade to produce that wow factor that snap shots fall far short of.
Just my tow cents...tow cents...err...ok...two cents...lol...
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but they all want to see them. Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
I know that when I am at weddings people are always checking out my equipment (camera ) and asking me about it.
People with other dslr's always seem to wander by to see what I am shooting with, probably where all those "I had a better camera than the pro photog and everybody said that my pictures were better than his" threads come from on the internet.
If the pros equipment is better than theirs then the pro is instantly awarded the status of being a legitimate pro photographer in their mind....so yeah gear does matter with regard to appearances and perception.
I shoot with top of the line equipment so that is not going to happen...:D
Yeah I use top of the line equipment because I enjoy using it and makes my job much easier.
Are the pictures any better than when I was just starting out with lesser grade equipment, yeah, but only because my skills have improved and my low light and depth of field capabilities are greatly improved because of equipment which enables me to get the "look" that I like.
But....if I had to go back and use the same equipment I started out with I think my pictures would be just as good today...they would just have a different look. There would be more balanced flash shots and less short depth of field other wise pretty much the same.
Wedding photography is one of the few photography mediums where you can get away with less that critical sharpness, which helps.
So yeah gear does matter, just not in the way some people think.
Less than top of the line gear does not limit a true professionals ability to produce quality photos,
and gear will not magically enhance the photo making skills of someone with less developed skills. This is especially true in the field of wedding photography.
Nice shots...and if you got them in RAW...easily doctored in post processing. Good work. I've been to weddings where I didn't want to interfere with the hired photog...You can only get a limited number of good shots...otherwise the pro starts wondering if you are horning in on his post wedding sales. And, rightfully so. I've seen contracts where the hired pro won't allow anyone to photograph the wedding with pro gear.
In all honesty, she got dressed, got her bridesmaids ready to go and was killing time before her 'tog even saw her, the first shot he did of them was their first look shots, I was the one in the room when mom and MOH were fastening her gown. If he didn't want somebody else shooting it, he should have been there. I don't know the contract, I don't know when she told him to show up, but I literally showed up seconds after she did, to make sure I had access to everything. As far as formals go, I didn't shoot a single one, I should have, but didn't. He did all of those, I just sat and watched (and cringed at his setup).
Commentary on showing up at weddings with Digital DSLR's...
Everyone talks about uncle Bob and Aunt Bessie with their DSLR's as if they were bimbos...well, some of those Uncle Bobs and Aunt Bessies are decent amateur photographers with a lot of post processing expertise. So, being wary of wedding party/guests with DSLR's is warranted in my opinion. No one wants one of the guests to run home...whip out 40 or 50 images post processed in CS4 and email them to the bride before she has a chance to look at the pros stuff...and I think that's why a lot of photographers have gone to the who fee up front...including the price of the wedding images. Then, Uncles and Aunties with DSLR's don't really matter much.
Frankly...what separates a lot of the pros from DSLR snap shooters is post processing...shooting in RAW and then nailing the image in post...using the tricks of the trade to produce that wow factor that snap shots fall far short of.
Just my tow cents...tow cents...err...ok...two cents...lol...
Should I go ahead and say that she had her gallery, order AND prints in hand before she even saw her pro's pictures? I did her bridals, her wedding and when their new addition comes around in October, I'm doing that, too. Again, he should have been doing his job. She was married in Mid-October, I gave her the prints NYE - they still hadn't seen a single proof shot by then.
Again, he should have been doing his job. She was married in Mid-October, I gave her the prints NYE - they still hadn't seen a single proof shot by then.
Wow
The term "proof" in this case perhaps means, show me PROOF you still have these photos.
The term "proof" in this case perhaps means, show me PROOF you still have these photos.
I know, right? Granted, it was 6 weeks by that point. I'm not really sure when she got her actual proofs (I know she got them on CD at one point), but not even a single *teaser* - we usually have 5 or 6 teasers up within 48 hours. We've even had one up within 2 hours before.
L. K. I'm not knocking you...I think you did the right thing. You gave the bride some shots that she wouldn't have otherwise received. I recently attended a wedding where the photographers were friends of the family, using pro gear, and I think did a good job, although I haven't seen the final images. And, like you, I stayed out of the way during the ceremony, but I know I got shots that the wedding photographer didn't get, because I was the only one in the parking lot when they were dressing up the get away car.
My comments about Uncle Bob and Auntie Bessie are just my observations in general as related to wedding photography and the current trend where wedding photographers are collecting payment in full before the wedding, including for the images. There's so much talk about Uncle Bobs and how they supposedly can't shoot or compete with the wedding photographer and just get in the way...well, if they have a decent camera...and practice a little...yes, they will get good shots...not as many...but...a good camera will take decent images if you put it on program and frame and pull the trigger, especially the newer low light DSLR's. The current crop of new cameras are making it ever easier for the newbie to photography to get great pictures...talking T2i here with ISO 6400...flashes aren't as relevant as they used to be. Someone sitting in the first couple of rows with a T2i may be getting shots that you as the wedding photographer may not have access to, especially if the bride and groom are fairly well lighted. And, if the wedding photographer is made to wait at the back of the church and shoot down the isle. It's something to think about...
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but they all want to see them. Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Comments
My Camera Takes Really Nice Pictures
Well you guys wanna hear a confession? I started with a Rebel XT it seems like forever ago. I have since donated it to my 9 yar old daughter's never ending new photography obsession... so it is still around. Every now and then I pick it up and I can REALLY tell a difference in quality and color rendering. That isn't to say that I didn't get some really great photos with that camera back in the day... Some of my favorites (even now) were made with that thing. But that doesn't mean that I don't need and love my pair of 5D IIs.
The other thing about using less than the greatest gear is that you REALLY GOTTA NAIL IT in camera. It just isn't as forgiving. And not only that, it is way more restricting in the conditions that you can nail things.
Shot with Rebel XT and the 28-135:
And this wedding I ended up using the Rebel XT (it was backup at that point) and it was fine and dandy.
it's not that the shots get better technically though it can..it has a lot to do with keeper rates and getting shots that you can't get before. Now tell me how can a client comment on the technical quality of a shot or comment at all if noise was so bad that you culled it? cmon folks..we all like to think that camera/equipment doesn't matter but it does. Also there is issue here with standard of equipment that we are talking about here. Tenoverthnose may not have the state of the art equipment but I bet he has good quality lens, cameras, and enough flashes so as to not hinder his imagination. He has what he needs to do what he wants. Take away all his flashes and leave him with a rebel and kit lens. He may still come up with good stuff..but different.. and not what he might have imagined and probably overall not as good when you consider the whole set.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
So, am I a better photographer now than when I relied on my XT? Oh, yeah. And I sure can do more with my XT now than I could then.
I imagine, if you gave a rookie a 5DII, their photos might get worse rather than better compared to the photos with their trusty point and shoot... no onboard flash... etc...
Technology increases in quality.... I hope to increase BOTH my skills and my gear to keep up with it. But the the most important or limiting factor (depending on who you are, lol) is behind the viewfinder. Just think... if digital photography equipment jumps in quality as much as it did in the last 10 years... holy cow!
Oh and you'll only take my 5Ds when you pry them out of my cold dead fingers... OR when I can't live without the next model, whichever comes first.
But with the advent of digital, better yet, a modicum of decent image quality, all the way from a "Rebel" to a MKIII it really depends on the skill, knowledge and eye of the photographer. We're all saying the same things. Know your gear, upgrade for your style and how those upgrades will benefit your abilities is all game.
Heck, this shot was with an XTI and a kit lens of all things
NAPP Member | Canon Shooter
Weddings/Portraits and anything else that catches my eye.
www.daveswartz.com
Model Mayhem site http://www.modelmayhem.com/686552
stickin' out of her lower lip....
Your selling stuff... your skill at capturing images that preserve memories in a way that "Uncle Frank" can't even come close to doing no matter what equipment he has. It's the eye that is attached to your brain that you are selling, not the camera that is attached to your hand. Equipment may limit but it does not enable.
Your selling stuff... if your customer, the bride, thinks an equipment list is important then it's important, period. You should have a list ready to go, only if asked of course. You should have a short story (elevator pitch) ready to go too, "I have a backup 'cause stuff happens. I have a fast lens to catch candid moments, I've enough spare batteries to do 5 weddings, just in case". Whatever, just short, less than 30 sec. clean and crisp. If you have a lot of equipment include the value "I have $20,000" worth of the latest equipment..." it shows you are financially committed to you business. If you think most of your competition has more equipment than you don't mention it.
If a competing 'tog doesn't have a list ready to go, you get more points. If the competing 'tog has a list but can't explain it, you get a lot more points. If the competing 'tog lectures the bride that it's not important you get a ton more points.
When bridal mags tell brides to ask for equipment lists, not matter how unrelated to reality the question is, the are just giving you another way to distinguish yourself from the competition and another facet you can use to market yourself. After all you are selling stuff.
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
Nice shots...and if you got them in RAW...easily doctored in post processing. Good work. I've been to weddings where I didn't want to interfere with the hired photog...You can only get a limited number of good shots...otherwise the pro starts wondering if you are horning in on his post wedding sales. And, rightfully so. I've seen contracts where the hired pro won't allow anyone to photograph the wedding with pro gear.
Commentary on showing up at weddings with Digital DSLR's...
Everyone talks about uncle Bob and Aunt Bessie with their DSLR's as if they were bimbos...well, some of those Uncle Bobs and Aunt Bessies are decent amateur photographers with a lot of post processing expertise. So, being wary of wedding party/guests with DSLR's is warranted in my opinion. No one wants one of the guests to run home...whip out 40 or 50 images post processed in CS4 and email them to the bride before she has a chance to look at the pros stuff...and I think that's why a lot of photographers have gone to the whole fee up front...including the price of the wedding images. Then, Uncles and Aunties with DSLR's don't really matter much.
Frankly...what separates a lot of the pros from DSLR snap shooters is post processing...shooting in RAW and then nailing the image in post...using the tricks of the trade to produce that wow factor that snap shots fall far short of.
Just my tow cents...tow cents...err...ok...two cents...lol...
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
People with other dslr's always seem to wander by to see what I am shooting with, probably where all those "I had a better camera than the pro photog and everybody said that my pictures were better than his" threads come from on the internet.
If the pros equipment is better than theirs then the pro is instantly awarded the status of being a legitimate pro photographer in their mind....so yeah gear does matter with regard to appearances and perception.
I shoot with top of the line equipment so that is not going to happen...:D
Yeah I use top of the line equipment because I enjoy using it and makes my job much easier.
Are the pictures any better than when I was just starting out with lesser grade equipment, yeah, but only because my skills have improved and my low light and depth of field capabilities are greatly improved because of equipment which enables me to get the "look" that I like.
But....if I had to go back and use the same equipment I started out with I think my pictures would be just as good today...they would just have a different look. There would be more balanced flash shots and less short depth of field other wise pretty much the same.
Wedding photography is one of the few photography mediums where you can get away with less that critical sharpness, which helps.
So yeah gear does matter, just not in the way some people think.
Less than top of the line gear does not limit a true professionals ability to produce quality photos,
and gear will not magically enhance the photo making skills of someone with less developed skills. This is especially true in the field of wedding photography.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
I like to use the analogy. "Wow, what a great meal that was, you must have nice pans"
www.leediehr.com
lee.diehr@gmail.com
It is not just the pans but higher quality fresh ingredients.....
In all honesty, she got dressed, got her bridesmaids ready to go and was killing time before her 'tog even saw her, the first shot he did of them was their first look shots, I was the one in the room when mom and MOH were fastening her gown. If he didn't want somebody else shooting it, he should have been there. I don't know the contract, I don't know when she told him to show up, but I literally showed up seconds after she did, to make sure I had access to everything. As far as formals go, I didn't shoot a single one, I should have, but didn't. He did all of those, I just sat and watched (and cringed at his setup).
Should I go ahead and say that she had her gallery, order AND prints in hand before she even saw her pro's pictures? I did her bridals, her wedding and when their new addition comes around in October, I'm doing that, too. Again, he should have been doing his job. She was married in Mid-October, I gave her the prints NYE - they still hadn't seen a single proof shot by then.
photography facebook
twitter
Wow
The term "proof" in this case perhaps means, show me PROOF you still have these photos.
I know, right? Granted, it was 6 weeks by that point. I'm not really sure when she got her actual proofs (I know she got them on CD at one point), but not even a single *teaser* - we usually have 5 or 6 teasers up within 48 hours. We've even had one up within 2 hours before.
photography facebook
twitter
My comments about Uncle Bob and Auntie Bessie are just my observations in general as related to wedding photography and the current trend where wedding photographers are collecting payment in full before the wedding, including for the images. There's so much talk about Uncle Bobs and how they supposedly can't shoot or compete with the wedding photographer and just get in the way...well, if they have a decent camera...and practice a little...yes, they will get good shots...not as many...but...a good camera will take decent images if you put it on program and frame and pull the trigger, especially the newer low light DSLR's. The current crop of new cameras are making it ever easier for the newbie to photography to get great pictures...talking T2i here with ISO 6400...flashes aren't as relevant as they used to be. Someone sitting in the first couple of rows with a T2i may be getting shots that you as the wedding photographer may not have access to, especially if the bride and groom are fairly well lighted. And, if the wedding photographer is made to wait at the back of the church and shoot down the isle. It's something to think about...
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
So true, so true.
www.leediehr.com
lee.diehr@gmail.com