You must have a Good Camera ?

Terrywoodenpic

Terrywoodenpic

Messages
7,908
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
How many times a year do you get someone saying "You must have a Good Camera" ?

Last night I was thanked, with those very words, for taking a series of shots Of her induction as a priest into our Church.
I had been limited to my seat and used my little black X20 so as not to be noticed... a suitable rather than an especially good camera.
And as she had not noticed me taking them, that part worked anyway. I had sent her small converted for web jpegs. so the quality was just passable but was limited to size.

I am not unused to people saying that, but on this occasion I was completely tongue tied. My inclination was to be sarcastic but on this occasion I could not.
 
everytime i go out with it. Someone posted something similar on TP before with a good comeback, which I have adopted, "I taught it everything it knows". Tends to shut them up. You do feel like hitting them with the lens though lol
 
I've had that loads of times, one lady once said to me 'oohhh you've got a big one' when i had my 70-300 zoom fully extended, she went bright red when she realised what she'd said.
 
Doesn't bother me in the slightest, not everyone is as keen on photography as us.
 
I saw an article the other day shared on Facebook about this very topic. Below I've summed up the jist of it, but I can't find the link so can't quote it.
Yes people say it, but it's true, we do have good equipment, and without some of our good equipment no matter how much skill we had we wouldn't be able to capture the images.
It's true that a skilled photographer can take a great image on any camera, be it a £50 point and shoot or a £35k Hassleblad. However sometimes what you're shooting requires that 'really good camera' or 'really good lens'.
The example in the article was a shot he had taken of a Hummingbird in flight which was pin sharp. He used a 600mm lens at high ISO. Something not really possible with an entry level DSLR, and definitely not possible with a point and shoot. We all like to make out that our 'tools' don't make the photo, we do, but to an extent, they do. In the same way a top chef uses thousand pound knives and a top artist uses expensive brushes.
I wish I could find the link now, it was very interesting to read.

Head to google, there's some quite funny responses if you type in 'you must have a really good camera responses'
 
Agree with that, i think some people just like to think its 100% them and the equipment has nothing to do with it.
 
JakeT1992 said:
Yep! If it was true we wouldn't be out spending ££££ on FF Cameras and things like Ziess lenses.
Click to expand...

Very few people who have FF cameras and Zeiss lenses either need them nor can spell them.
I have needed every thing from 10x8 monorail to Rolleiflex cameras, and every thing in between during my career, I have always chosen the most appropriate never the most costly. I never used 35mm as a professional.

Buying cameras can become rather like Buying a complete mobile Cabinet of Snap-on-tools. when you rarely even use a spanner.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Very few people who have FF cameras and Zeiss lenses either need them nor can spell them.
I have needed every thing from 10x8 monorail to Rolleiflex cameras, and every thing in between during my career, I have always chosen the most appropriate never the most costly. I never used 35mm as a professional.

Buying cameras can become rather like Buying a complete mobile Cabinet of Snap-on-tools. when you rarely even use a spanner.
Click to expand...
I always spell Zeiss the wrong way haha! I don't have a Zeiss lens, it was just an example.
I agree, buying gear can become the hobby, rather than using it to it's potential.
However I require the dynamic range capabilities of My 5DIII for a lot of landscape shooting, as well as the IQ. Low noise is also required for astro photography and shooting very long exposure. So while I would say you're correct, not all people do need it, I also wouldn't be producing some of the shots I do, with the capability to print and sell them, without the gear I own.
 
JakeT1992 said:
Yep! If it was true we wouldn't be out spending ££££ on FF Cameras and things like Ziess lenses.
Click to expand...

Best way to spend several £thousand. Then go shooting with it and it all makes sense. LV in D800, the dynamic range, the resolution, and Lee filters to balance it all out using histogram preview. It's pure joy I tell ye!!!!
 
Last edited:
JakeT1992 said:
I always spell Zeiss the wrong way haha! I don't have a Zeiss lens, it was just an example.
I agree, buying gear can become the hobby, rather than using it to it's potential.
However I require the dynamic range capabilities of My 5DIII for a lot of landscape shooting, as well as the IQ. Low noise is also required for astro photography and shooting very long exposure. So while I would say you're correct, not all people do need it, I also wouldn't be producing some of the shots I do, with the capability to print and sell them, without the gear I own.
Click to expand...

That is the right way to go... use what is appropriate for your work.
 
robj20 said:
Agree with that, i think some people just like to think its 100% them and the equipment has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...


It is always 100% down to them, Unless some one else chooses their equipment for them.
None of my equipment has ever taken a photograph by itself. Nor could it.
 
However much we say, "the photographer takes the pictures, not the camera", a good camera does help; and in certain situations I could not have taken a decent picture with a P&S or camera phone. for example, when light is very challenging.
But if you gave me a racing car it would not make me a good driver.
 
Chris Wilson said:
I've had several folk comment on the size/cost of my 600mm.
I either tell them that it compensates for my extremely small winky - or that it cost much the same a decent wrist watch.
That usually does the trick.

cheers, cw
Click to expand...


Interesting....
How do you measure a decent wrist watch?
By its accuracy?
Or its pedigree?
Or its Bling?

I had a battery changed in my Seconda, and the fellow called it a quality watch.

I was speechless in wonderment !!!!!
Peoples perception of Good and Quality astounds me.
Cameras and watches both.
 
I guess it's a bit like a top violinist sounds better playing a Stradivarius than a £25 Ebay special.
 
Get it loads of times aswell, for example I was out the other day in a hide with my 400mm f/2.8 setup and you get people coming in with like 500D's and 100-400mm bragging about what they have done with there photography, and others that ask how much does that 'beast' cost etc. ( the norm stuff )
 
Joeturner11 said:
Get it loads of times aswell, for example I was out the other day in a hide with my 400mm f/2.8 setup and you get people coming in with like 500D's and 100-400mm bragging about what they have done with there photography, and others that ask how much does that 'beast' cost etc. ( the norm stuff )
Click to expand...

I got that with the Zeiss and D800. I was at Hill House shooting and had the tripod out, and some guy with a small slr and kit lens started following me. He suggested I get low with the camera and I explained by doing that I'd not be able to keep it straight on both axis. I had to explain the principle of convergence to him. He looked baffled...LOL. He asked how much that gear I had cost, said around £3k and he said, how his gear was nearly as good and it would take good pictures. I said the person behind it wasn't upto taking good pictures....
 
Last edited:
I think whether full frame is needed or not, it is something that people aspire to and the larger format (over aps-c) does stress lenses less so generally sharper results can be obtained and there is the mythical 'full frame' look. personally when I look back at my film stuff from the 90's I don't see that look but then I didnt have 'the lenses' back then either.
 
ST4 said:
I got that with the Zeiss and D800. I was at Hill House shooting and had the tripod out, and some guy with a small slr and kit lens started following me. He suggested I get low with the camera and I explained by doing that I'd not be able to keep it straight on both axis. I had to explain the principle of convergence to him. He looked baffled...LOL. He asked how much that gear I had cost, said around £3k and he said, how his gear was nearly as good and it would take good pictures. I said the person behind it wasn't upto taking good pictures....
Click to expand...

I had the same sort of thing happen at When I was out in Devon, You get some guy that starts creeping near to you and looking to see what lens you got to start a chat which turned into being my 100-400mm can take just as good images as your 400mm f/2.8 convo, at this point he had not got one shot of the bird in flight as he was too busy talking about how good is gear was, I said to him, if you stopped talking about how good your supposedly gear is you may actually get something, and at that point I got what I wanted and moved on to another hide...
 
Chris Wilson said:
I've had several folk comment on the size/cost of my 600mm.
I either tell them that it compensates for my extremely small winky
Click to expand...

I say exactly the same when someone comments on my lens....



olympus-e-m10-hands-on-06-450x330.jpg



:banana::woot::thinking:
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Interesting....
How do you measure a decent wrist watch?
By its accuracy?
Or its pedigree?
Or its Bling?

I had a battery changed in my Seconda, and the fellow called it a quality watch.

I was speechless in wonderment !!!!!
Peoples perception of Good and Quality astounds me.
Cameras and watches both.
Click to expand...
It's all a little tongue in cheek, but the principle holds - if people thought before they spoke they wouldn't get a daft answer.
It's a bit like turning round to someone and complimenting them on their child and then asking how much they'd spent on it -
Obviously you can get a couple of decent watches for the price of a used 600mm - as for the size of my winky - that's between myself, the missus and her magnifying glass ;)

cheers, cw
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
How many times a year do you get someone saying "You must have a Good Camera" ?

Last night I was thanked, with those very words, for taking a series of shots Of her induction as a priest into our Church.
I had been limited to my seat and used my little black X20 so as not to be noticed... a suitable rather than an especially good camera.
And as she had not noticed me taking them, that part worked anyway. I had sent her small converted for web jpegs. so the quality was just passable but was limited to size.

I am not unused to people saying that, but on this occasion I was completely tongue tied. My inclination was to be sarcastic but on this occasion I could not.
Click to expand...
Perhaps she was being sarcastic
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
How many times a year do you get someone saying "You must have a Good Camera" ?
Click to expand...

Maybe 3-4, if I am lucky.

I prefer to think they are complementing my prowess an virility, mumble something about squirrels,
and say ''you're welcome.''
 
Needs a service, Steve. My Oyster is within a second per week if I wear it every day and it's older than me! I have a couple of Casios and a Citizen that are as accurate as any watch realistically can be - radio controlled.

I have a few good cameras and manage a few good pictures with them. The best camera I have (or at least the one that takes the best pictures) is the one I happen to have in my hand at the time!
 
Nod said:
Needs a service, Steve. My Oyster is within a second per week if I wear it every day and it's older than me! I have a couple of Casios and a Citizen that are as accurate as any watch realistically can be - radio controlled.

!
Click to expand...

I had it serviced only 3 years ago. Even when it was new (2007), it was never brilliant, within +5 sec a day, so within tolerance. Rolex's are normally pretty good, but this one ain't. I'll bite the bullet next year or the year after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top