Bit of a Rant , The Cost of Photography

gothgirl said:
Thing is , for what I shoot , I do need faster lenses ... For example, shooting equine and dog sports in a dingy arena where you cant use flash
Click to expand...
gothgirl said:
I would love to be a profesional photographer , I would love to buy L glass , Full Frame and really work at it...
Click to expand...
We're back here and I think you still haven't answered the question.

You would love to be a professional photographer. So what's stopping you? Write the business plan, invest in the gear you'll need to implement the plan (which includes paying for the gear, naturally), and do it. Or not, the choice is yours. But so far as I can see the only person who might stop you doing that is you.

If I've misjudged the situation and there are objective factors which prevent you doing it, then I apologise for my insensitivity. But if that's the case, then perhaps you need to think about getting a different hobby. I mean, I would love to be an astronaut, and I would love to open the batting for England at Lords, but at my stage of life I recognise that I'm probably never going to do either of those things. So I don't worry about them, except perhaps in a vague slightly wistful way when I've had a couple of pints, and they don't keep me awake at night, and I don't complain on internet forums about how unfair it is. Instead I try to focus on things I can do, within the constraints that I impose on myself and others impose on me. I think I'm probably happier that way.
 
Furring circus its find putting up a shot from a sigma 600 zoom ,and stating its not up to your mega expensive L glass ,BUT the sigmas are tuneable ,do we or you know if it's been firmware updated ,and then tuned to its optimum performance in every way .
The only advantage of the 500 and 600 L lenses comes when the light levels drop in winter ,and even then modern sensors with higher iso capabilities are eroding that advantage ,the only real things needed in wildlife are sharpness and focus speed
 
Instead of starting with 'I can't afford...' why not think 'what would it take for me to afford...'. Then your brain will think of ways to earn that extra to get what you want/need.

If you need a certain level of equipment to do a job properly then that's what you need. All trades have tools. Certain jobs require expensive ones. Photography is no different.It's frustrating but that's how it is.

If you need to invest in expensive equipment to earn the money to afford that expensive equipment then there is a lot to be said for hunting down long 0% credit deals. If you can spread the cost and have the equipment earn the money back quickly then it is a reasonable risk to take if you have the potential clients already interested and it is only the lack of specific equipment that is stopping you earning a good chunk of money.
 
Gothgirl have you tried a business plan and applying for a free grant for your start up? It's loads of schemes about.
 
" Amateurs just love cameras more than photography and you'll never talk them around.” Well, there’s a sweeping statement! I would imagine that there are going to be a different set of attitudes and approaches amongst professionals to their work and the tools that they use as well as when compared with people who do it is an interest / hobby.

It is quite obvious, for example, at the Photo show, that there are a group of people, usually men, who wander around with a camera and long lens, eyeing up others’ kit looking, to my mind, rather foolish. On the other hand, it does nobody any harm. I find also that those in a “p******g” competition are more concerned with who has what kit but not all amateurs are like that. I have encountered helpful encouraging amateurs and equally helpful and encouraging professionals who don’t care what you use to get your images. If it vexes Gothgirl to not have the kit she wants and be fed up with those that do/their perceived attitude, there seems to be a lot of advice here; carpe diem!

I am fortunate; I don’t have to earn a living from photography and can just enjoy it. Sometimes, that means I have a shiny new thing to enjoy. It doesn’t mean I think I am any better than anybody else or that my photography is any better than anybody else’s. It just means I smile a lot; love it love it love!
 
StewartR said:
We're back here and I think you still haven't answered the question.

You would love to be a professional photographer. So what's stopping you? Write the business plan, invest in the gear you'll need to implement the plan (which includes paying for the gear, naturally), and do it. Or not, the choice is yours. But so far as I can see the only person who might stop you doing that is you.

If I've misjudged the situation and there are objective factors which prevent you doing it, then I apologise for my insensitivity.

Snip
.
Click to expand...

rjbell said:
Gothgirl have you tried a business plan and applying for a free grant for your start up? It's loads of schemes about.
Click to expand...

Not going into personal details , but I cannot be a full time photographer due to family situations.
 
You wouldn't need to be full time and tax credits will help financially.
 
Speaking personally I neither want to know or care what anyone is or isn't using, their business what they spend their cash on

Seems these days people are far more interested in what everyone else is doing, sign of the times I suppose with the prevalence of social media.

Who honestly wants to know when I buy something on Amazon for example a replacement fish tank pump filter, whatever happened to wanting privacy. There is a button on Amazon to press so I can share that momentous news on facebook, absolutely ridiculous especially for me as I have none of those type of accounts

Even more absurd are the plethora of videos featuring people opening their newly bought goods. Think my efforts trying to open those vacuum packs of bacon would merit a 18 rating, never can peel those bleeders open.
 
Last edited:
tijuana taxi said:
Even more absurd are the plethora of videos featuring people opening their newly bought goods. Think my efforts trying to open those vacuum packs of bacon would merit a 18 rating, never can peel those bleeders open.
Click to expand...

Kids are obsessed with watching toy opening videos. The bigger YouTube channels are taking millions the biggest one started by a young couple in the home are taking estimated $18 million a year!!!!!
 
rjbell said:
Kids are obsessed with watching toy opening videos. The bigger YouTube channels are taking millions the biggest one started by a young couple in the home are taking estimated $18 million a year!!!!!
Click to expand...
Exactly I've got a lot of respect for them. They get what people want. The son of one my neighbours is a vlugger. It was him at 19 years old who bought his parents house with swimming pool and tennis court. Got the latest Lambo and got knows what. All down to his YouTube channel. a video of my camera unboxing. Made about 300. The videos of my VW Golf R are still revenue generating.

It's nice for a toy fund
 
dejongj said:
Exactly I've got a lot of respect for them. They get what people want. The son of one my neighbours is a vlugger. It was him at 19 years old who bought his parents house with swimming pool and tennis court. Got the latest Lambo and got knows what. All down to his YouTube channel. a video of my camera unboxing. Made about 300. The videos of my VW Golf R are still revenue generating.

It's nice for a toy fund
Click to expand...
My boy wants to do it. A more UK-sentric version as lots of the toys are not available here. I should get on and do it!

Made about 300 hits or pounds?
 
Last edited:
rjbell said:
My boy wants to do it. A more UK-sentric version as lots of the toys are not available here. I should get on and do it!

Made about 300 hits or pounds?
Click to expand...
Pounds sterling :)

Our neighbours son made millions, and it is now a proper business. Video production team and everything. It has become a day job. Quit a few people working behind the scenes to produce the material. Just shows the power of advertising.
 
dejongj said:
Pounds sterling :)

Our neighbours son made millions, and it is now a proper business. Video production team and everything. It has become a day job. Quit a few people working behind the scenes to produce the material. Just shows the power of advertising.
Click to expand...

I'm curious to see what earns millions on YouTube. Got a link?
 
Pookeyhead said:
I'm curious to see what earns millions on YouTube. Got a link?
Click to expand...
I've got to ask my daughter, she and everyone in school go there. I just see the wealth and production behind it.

EDIT: I'm not the target audience, but can appreciate new media and how the world has changed.
 
Last edited:
rjbell said:
This is the one i was referring too. Over 4 million subscribers estimated annual revenue $18m.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsU-ktDYPSvRyRqcFV4uXPw
Click to expand...

Not particularly surprising. Ask my 10 year nephew to name what I would think of as conventional celebs (i.e. TV, music, film) and he'd struggle, yet he does know in depth a whole world of people I have never heard of that seem to have built their names purely on Youtube. Other parents I know have taken their kids to London (from the South West) just to go to events to hear these people speak.
 
Dave70D said:
I would never want to be a Pro photographer as taking photos is my hobby that for me is great fun.
Click to expand...

eeerm it's not all doom and gloom being a pro... In my ninth year and it's great fun as well :)
 
Dear Goth girl, I'm disheartened to hear you sounding so frustrated. I love your passion in your voice, your desire. Yes, I can understand your frustration at how lay people can sometimes perceive a good photographer or photography as synonomous with big expensive 'pro' equipment. Annoying. And that a 'good' camera must always produce a 'good' picture. Idiotic. Maybe in technical terms this is true. But in pictorial terms, it is certainly not true. And really, which result is more important? Most lay people can't tell the difference between a camera phone picture and one shot with a high end DSLR. And these are your potencial customers. What they want are stunning images. Not necessarilly technically stunning images, just stunning images. So the answer must be to always work to your strengths within the limits of the equipment to hand. This is what true professionalism means. It's getting the best results despite the obstacles. Maybe because of the obstacles. Keep shooting, keep smiling, follow your vision and you will be fine. Here's a technically rubbish shot I took yesterday of my grandchild, using an old 12mp D90 camera and a 35 year old lens. Fully manual, including focusing. Screw the pixel peepers, I think it's just fine.

Jamie in Repose Hi Key.jpg
 
gothgirl said:
the 35mm f2 is something I've considered next to the 24mm 2.8 stm

I'm very happy with primes, my 50 1.8 stm lives on my camera, but I needed something wider
Click to expand...


The EF-S 24mm STM is a super lens for it's size. I have had 2 as I passed my first one, as a loaner, to a family member.

I shifted to the EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake which I have had for a long while BUT very quickly found I missed the 24mm.

I bought another and with the £20 Canon cashback (ends on 31.8.16) it came in at £95. A bargain. Lightweight and fast (enough), it is in use daily. I have my full kit with me but I would say, most of my current shots are done with prime lenses. The exception is the 70-200L

So most used -

24mm/40m/60mm/100(macro) and 14mm (Samyang) on DSLR and 22mm on EOS M

Plus the Helios 55mm 44-M4.

I have the 50mm f/1.8 STM but it seems a littl too short some days and a little too long on other days.

Lately I have found/rediscovered a kind of 'retro' feel to how I want go shoot. The zooms are great but most of my current shoots are static and I have time and solitude to wait for the light and also use bracketing for 'safety'. If I was shooting moving objects that limit time to shoot, it would change the dynamics of my current photography. (As it did for a few hours las weekend).

At the end of the day it is about what you actually need and not desire.

All the lenses above were bought second hand except the 24mm and the 70-200). Originally the Primes were a bit of a throwback to my early 35mm film days when prime was what you started with. Now first choice.

Both the Sigma ART 20mm and 30mm lenses are glorious and I got the chance to try the 20mm for a couple of hours and the 30mm for a weekend. I liked them both and the 30mm is on my shopping list when/if I need i!

I have an old Sigma 20mm f/2 which I picked up in a s/h shop recently on my current trip in Ireland for €23. It is really for an EOS film camera (will not AF on DSLR) so I have 2 rolls of film sent off for processing from a day on myEOS 5 35mm.

I also have a Cosina 19-35mm EF mount which will AF on a DSLR.

The Helios 55mm 44-M4 is great fun for, usually, less than £30. The options are endless and are great for playing with light. I do cheat sometimes as I have a light meter but using your space tech DSLR with M42 lenses from a long time ago can be a real test for the photographer. I also still have my Pentax M kit from the 1980s. K Mount and as manual as M42 on a DSLR (and the EOS M. Some 28mm f/2.8 M lenses go for £25-40 on the bay in super condition. Worth a try, testing yourself with focal lengths you may find suit you while you save up £600 for a 20mm ART! That said a 35 year old s/h Pentax 20mm f/4 prime in good coddition will set you back £250-300, if you can find one. About the same for a 50mm f/1.2..... the very good 50mm f/1.4 between £75-120. Plus £5 for a K Mount adapter.

High end lenses were never cheap.

In summary, you don't have to bemoan and get frustratedat not having great quality glass now. Go retro while you save. Seek out the conversion factors for old glass so you can get the focal lengths comparable AND enjoy the challenge of learning with minimal 'on board' assistance.

I know a couple of pro photographers who use old glass, quirks and all.

Best wishes.

Steve
 
Nick Owen said:
Dear Goth girl, I'm disheartened to hear you sounding so frustrated. I love your passion in your voice, your desire. Yes, I can understand your frustration at how lay people can sometimes perceive a good photographer or photography as synonomous with big expensive 'pro' equipment. Annoying. And that a 'good' camera must always produce a 'good' picture. Idiotic. Maybe in technical terms this is true. But in pictorial terms, it is certainly not true. And really, which result is more important? Most lay people can't tell the difference between a camera phone picture and one shot with a high end DSLR. And these are your potencial customers. What they want are stunning images. Not necessarilly technically stunning images, just stunning images. So the answer must be to always work to your strengths within the limits of the equipment to hand. This is what true professionalism means. It's getting the best results despite the obstacles. Maybe because of the obstacles. Keep shooting, keep smiling, follow your vision and you will be fine. Here's a technically rubbish shot I took yesterday of my grandchild, using an old 12mp D90 camera and a 35 year old lens. Fully manual, including focusing. Screw the pixel peepers, I think it's just fine.

View attachment 71839
Click to expand...


I know I said I'm out of this thread.... and I am so far as discussion goes, but that's a magic image, and makes my point better than I ever could with words.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I know I said I'm out of this thread.... and I am so far as discussion goes, but that's a magic image, and makes my point better than I ever could with words.
Click to expand...
I too though it was a lovely image, not because of the equipment used, i only know what was used because it's written in the post. I would guess (and it is a guess) that most people that view photos don't care what equipment it was taken with.
My Dad is an artist, art lecturer and sculptor. The people that buy his paintings or view his exhibitions, really don't care how expensive, what brand of paints or brushes he uses. They buy a painting or view his exhibitions for the artwork, that's all.
 
Last edited:
Hugh Jarse said:
I have an old Sigma 20mm f/2 which I picked up in a s/h shop recently on my current trip in Ireland for €23. It is really for an EOS film camera (will not AF on DSLR) so I have 2 rolls of film sent off for processing from a day on myEOS 5 35mm.
Click to expand...

That sounds odd, I still have my EOS 620, one of the very earliest of the range, and to my knowledge, all my lenses will auto focus on this body. It's a bit slow by modern standards though....

When I bought my first DSLR (EOS 350D), I went with Canon so I could use my existing film body lenses. I still have the original 50mm f1.8 and it's still bloody good. You just can't beat good glass.
 
Jelster said:
That sounds odd, I still have my EOS 620, one of the very earliest of the range, and to my knowledge, all my lenses will auto focus on this body. It's a bit slow by modern standards though....

When I bought my first DSLR (EOS 350D), I went with Canon so I could use my existing film body lenses. I still have the original 50mm f1.8 and it's still bloody good. You just can't beat good glass.
Click to expand...
It used to be discussed a lot, there a lot of early Sigma lenses that don't AF on later bodies. But when I say a 'lot' that's actually a tiny number of lenses for Canon AF, most of which are dead by now.
 
Jelster said:
That sounds odd, I still have my EOS 620, one of the very earliest of the range, and to my knowledge, all my lenses will auto focus on this body. It's a bit slow by modern standards though....

When I bought my first DSLR (EOS 350D), I went with Canon so I could use my existing film body lenses. I still have the original 50mm f1.8 and it's still bloody good. You just can't beat good glass.
Click to expand...
The 20mm focuses fine on the EOS5 film body I have with me but will not AF on my 750D. It is the Mk II version of the lens.

As Phil mentions many of the older (early) EF mount lenses do not AF on later models. A sift through the internet has offered the reason that the early lens electronics lacked the necessary connection to the camera for AF. In any case it seemed to on the 5 film body but I will not know until the pictures are back. As I was shooting fixed objects I did 1 shot AF and 1 manual.

From the thread theme, the use of old and vintage glass can bear fruit whilst saving for new glass. In the case of the Helios 44 - mine is with me permanently and with a set of 42mm tubes.
 
Byker28i said:
Hi DAn,
How qualified are you to offer that advice? :D
Click to expand...
Coming back to this with an idea...
The 'Beginners' section is a nightmare - with lots of beginners questions turning into bunfights because 'not quite still beginners' muddying the waters by offering answers that might be less than useful.

There's 2 sides to this -
It's the internet, we don't want to stifle debate, all opinions are valid.
Or rather than a 'beginners' section we should try 'ask the experts', where answers would be provided only be people who actually know what they're talking about. I'd be happy to be blacklisted from offering an opinion on something if only people best placed to answer were giving responses.
 
Interesting topic.

I certainly was the limiting factor when I bought my first camera. In fact all of my cameras.

I do like having good kit too. I am fortunate that my day job allowed me to buy decent kit. I'm not a pro and don't have any aspirations to be one.

I learnt on digital and am now enjoying film photography at the fraction of the cost of my digital kit.

I've started reading more than buying more kit. My daughter is showing an interest and has got a d90 (exactly what I learnt on, but hers was very cheap and she put some of her own money towards it!) I think that once she learns the technicalities, she will be much better than me. She has a naturally artistic eye and sees things in a way that I don't.
 
TheDrift- said:
It's worth remembering a lot of the greatest photos ever taken, were taken on worse kit than you have.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I wonder what we'd be like as photographers if we only had the kit Ansel Adams had to play with?

I think most of us would have given up!
 
Don't forget, whatever the kit you own, someone will always have something 'better'. Just as 6x6 was considered better then 35mm and 4x5 better than 6x6 and 8x10 better than 4x5. And then there's the 20x24 Polaroid Land camera... and on, and on. It's not the kit, it's the photographer.
 
Time spent 'looking' and shooting is more valuable than how much gear you have or how old it is. It will always be photographer over kit in my opinion.
I try and shoot weekly. Sometimes I will have a couple of images I like, other times not so much but I see it as all part of it.

It's very easy to chase the next best thing. Hands up, I've been guilty several times in the past. A simple 35mm camera with a 50mm helped get out of this and for me, it's pretty much the focal length I shoot now all the time. Depends what you shoot obviously, but spending a good amount of time with one focal length I feel has helped me greatly and I would recommend it to anyone starting out, rather than loads of lenses and zooms etc.

I agree it can be expensive, but just ignore what others are doing with regards to how much money they are spending etc. I don't think it means a lot in the grand scale. I think a lot learn down the line with photography.

I shoot what works for me. While they are just tools, I have always felt that it's a case of picking what feels right that's in reach financially, and really I feel that with anything be it a general appliance, an instrument, etc. Some things just feel and work right for you.
 
I think apart from investing in a fast 24 or 35 prime (which I will need for an upcoming shoot) , I'm going to stick with my equipment

Maybe buy a couple of good books and do some more reading to try and get the best out of my skill and the kit that I have
 
cowboy said:
My own photography has improved more through workshops and practicing what I learned than it ever did through buying gear.
Click to expand...

This. Always this. I've stated this countless times on here, but it's advice that is rarely taken up, sadly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top