Remember Nikonians - you're only as good as the gear you use

[HelmutRS]

I think someone who knows the limitations of his mediocre kit, and knows how to work within those limitations, will consistently take exceptional pics.

Agree!

 

[Jola]

Agree!

I don't, only applies to a very limited subject range.

But it also depends on what you mean by mediocre kit.

A P&S is often useless, but something like a D5100, which some people would also regard as mediocre, could take some great pictures with the right lens.

For example, a D5100 and a 70-300VR could be pretty good for wildlife, just try to stick to the 100-200mm range (which is effectively more as this is a DX camera).

And wedding pictures with a D5100 and a good lens would also be fine - just use a good flash.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Yes, for a limited selection of subjects, but certain type of pics, he just cannot take.

Isn't that working within the limitations?

For example, my Sony P&S just won't focus on flying birds, and digital crops just destroy the picture. In short, it just can't do it.

As far as I can make out, this thread is about SLRs, apart from a Dolby post...

 

[Dolby]

Yea - my bad ... I clicked later it was SLRs ...

 

[Quantum Theory]

You guys are funny.

LOL @ Bwana. Thanks for this wakeup on a monday morning. I agree with you, all Nikon fans think their gear is the Sh@t.

...and Canon users?

I think someone who knows the limitations of his mediocre kit, and knows how to work within those limitations, will consistently take exceptional pics.

So, you agree that he would be limited without the right kit. A good photographer with mediocre kit, will consistently take good photos (working within limitations)... he might even take a couple of great ones and it will certainly be a lot better than a novice with the same gear. However, he will only consistently take exceptional photos (perfect in every way), with the right pro kit.

This is all I'm trying to say. A good photographer with mediocre gear, will be even better with pro gear. This is what Nikon are saying in the OP...

 

[bwana]

Says the man with the expensive kit, again…

says the man who clearly acknowledged that there is some specialist gear for specialist tasks.

So you are saying that you can photograph sport with a 1100D and EF-S 55-250mm IS kit lens, and get the same exceptional results that you would get with a 1D and a long prime?

When I started freelancing all of my published sports images came from a 400D and a sigma 150-500. When I photographed Bryan Adams some of my best images came from the 400D and a 50mm f/1.4.

I'm just saying that a photographer can't make a lens sharper, can't magically create more focus points, can't make noise disappear.

There are plenty of sharp inexpensive lenses available. The majority of the people I shoot with hardly use any of the focus points available to them.

So, you agree that he would be limited without the right kit.

All kit has limitations but the biggest one sits behind the eyepiece, not in front. If someone is a mediocre photographer it's easy for them to believe their gear is holding them back instead of facing the hard truth that they may in fact be a mediocre photographer.

 

[Jola]

Isn't that working within the limitations?

For some cameras, then, the range of limitations is so big as to make it useless.

As far as I can make out, this thread is about SLRs, apart from a Dolby post...

Makes no difference - still can't focus on flying birds with a D40. Actually about the same as a P&S, except that you can use good lenses (but only AF-S).

 

[[OUPA]MrNutz]

Hi Guys

i'd like to buy someone a camera kit - her goals are to take maternity shots ; basic wedding pictures and group/school pictures.

any recommendations? 600d? 5100?

have about 10-12k to let go.

 

[Quantum Theory]

All kit has limitations but the biggest one sits behind the eyepiece, not in front. If someone is a mediocre photographer it's easy for them to believe their gear is holding them back instead of facing the hard truth that they may in fact be a mediocre photographer.

I agree with this and I never said that this wasn't true...

I said that quality gear, will make a good photographer even better. I shoot landscapes with a D90 and Sigma 8-16mm. When viewing them large, they are not perfect. Now, if I could afford a D3x with a Nikkor 12-24mm lens, I'm sure I can get closer to perfection.

 

[HelmutRS]

Ok, I don't think gear makes the photographer.

It seems close to everyone almost always think the camera and gear makes the shot. Irrespective Of the hours you might spend in photoshop to make people look like they really think they do.

Also It is a generally accepted fact that Nikon fans think their gear makes their shots. Lol.

If you know every possible setting on your camera and use what you have with confidence you will get the shot, even if you have to tie a flashlight to your camera with the shutter on a 3 sec timer with 21 Fstop and gooi the damn bird flying over.

Saying that, if you shoot for large print then you will need something that shoots in RAW.

To mention I have a friend that just bought a canon 7D 15-85 because he saw some of my shots. Lol, I can't wait to see the shots and reaction of the first chick's dubble chin in focus he posts on facebook.

 

[HelmutRS]

says the man who clearly acknowledged that there is some specialist gear for specialist tasks.
When I started freelancing all of my published sports images came from a 400D and a sigma 150-500. When I photographed Bryan Adams some of my best images came from the 400D and a 50mm f/1.4.

There are plenty of sharp inexpensive lenses available. The majority of the people I shoot with hardly use any of the focus points available to them. All kit has limitations but the biggest one sits behind the eyepiece, not in front. If someone is a mediocre photographer it's easy for them to believe their gear is holding them back instead of facing the hard truth that they may in fact be a mediocre photographer.

Sorry to hear you had to shoot Bryan Adams. My sympathies

 

[BigAl-sa]

Makes no difference - still can't focus on flying birds with a D40. Actually about the same as a P&S, except that you can use good lenses (but only AF-S).

For some cameras, then, the range of limitations is so big as to make it useless.





Makes no difference - still can't focus on flying birds with a D40. Actually about the same as a P&S, except that you can use good lenses (but only AF-S).

so agitated that you're stuttering

 

[Jola]

so agitated that you're stuttering

Actually, I was posting on my tablet, I'm not a great lover of soft keyboards

Also poor internet has been making posting problematic.

In short however, I do believe that good equipment makes a difference, within reason.

For example, you could take pretty good shoots in a variety of disciplines with a D5100 with a 16-85 DX lens.

But forget about submitting it to Getty Images, unless there is some really special aspect to it.

But the real problem comes with the good telephoto lenses - it is just really difficult to approximate the results that you can get with a 500/4VR or 600/4VR with lower cost equipment.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Actually, I was posting on my tablet, I'm not a great lover of soft keyboards

But the real problem comes with the good telephoto lenses - it is just really difficult to approximate the results that you can get with a 500/4VR or 600/4VR with lower cost equipment.

Can't speak for Nikon, but I got some really nice pics with a C500 f/4 on a 350d. The 350d can't be too far off the d40 as far as quality goes (apart from the focus motor "issues").

 

[Jola]

Can't speak for Nikon, but I got some really nice pics with a C500 f/4 on a 350d. The 350d can't be too far off the d40 as far as quality goes (apart from the focus motor "issues").

That's probably true, but that is an expensive lens.

But a newer "low-end" dSLR, like the D5100 will knock the socks off an D40 - mainly because of 16Mp and good iso.

That said, I also have some great shots with a 500/4L & 30D (also 8Mp like the 350D).

In fact, one of my better flying bird shots was with a D70 (quite similar to a D40). But it was just luck, the % of keepers was very low, the camera just could not focus on fast moving subjects.

 

[w1z4rd]

In forumla1, because the drivers are pretty equally matched, its often the car that wins the race. Just saying...

 

[HelmutRS]

In forumla1, because the drivers are pretty equally matched, its often the car that wins the race. Just saying...

That is why I don't watch it any more since Senna died Ironic that a Redbull racing team has won now for the 2nd time. So in essence branding makes the team, lol.

 

[bwana]

On second thought . . . if you guys want to throw money at expensive top notch gear that's fine by me but could you please make sure it's canon stuff.

 

[HelmutRS]

On second thought . . . if you guys want to throw money at expensive top notch gear that's fine by me but could you please make sure it's canon stuff.

You know it

 

[fxit_man]

On second thought . . . if you guys want to throw money at expensive top notch gear that's fine by me but could you please make sure it's canon stuff.

Just curious (and I do have Canon gear only ), why do you say this?