Can I shoot professional photos with a small beginner digital camera?

Can you take great pictures with a cheap camera - yes. Maybe the best way to learn too as you will quickly find the limitations and know better what you need to upgrade to overcome them as you progress.
 
It's not the equipement, it's the photographer. An old work mate was into photography, spent £1000's on the very best but couldn't shoot a barn door from 50 paces away bless him.

No problem starting inexpensive and starting to learn your craft.
 
Its not the kit that counts its you and hoe creative you are with what you've got.
 
all comes down to perception or interpretation of 'professional'

an image of professional quality can be taken on any gear, but the latest and best make it easier to create a digital image, coupled with the skill of the image maker.... however, if the images make no money then the photographer won't be a professional photographer..

On the other hand some images won't be of 'professional' quality yet some images taken on the spur of the moment and can yield mega-bucks for the photographer, regardless of apparatus are just as qualified to be described as 'professional'

If you want a camera to be sure to generate income on a regular basis, the better the camera the more likely - again all down to skill and possibilities....

From someone who has D810, D500 and K-1 - all pro-spec but no idea - so no income therefore not professional. :)
 
OP was last seen 8 days ago, after their 2nd post...
 
kendo1 said:
OP was last seen 8 days ago, after their 2nd post...
Click to expand...

Probably got scared off.

In response to the original question though, I think there are lots of limitations to bear in mind depending on which way you go.

The first, of course, is the person behind the camera. I've seen some stunning compositions on iPhones/camera phones. Where a better camera would only really allow you to print bigger and not actually 'improve' things.

The second, is the physical size of what the OP is after. It would be very easy to get a prosumer DSLR from a few years back and a SH 50mm 1.8 for around £100. I recently bought a Canon 50d for £50, but had I shopped around I might have got it a little cheaper. And I've seen 50mm niftys go on here for around £50. Something like that would be a great tool to learn about apertures, shutter speeds and ISO, but it would be too big to fit in a pocket.

I have to say that I've been disappointed by almost all of my PAS cameras for out-and-out image quality. The only one I really liked was a Pentax Optio 550 for the way it handled light. But I think looking back that was because it would go down to f/2.8 so you would start to get some of limited DOF in certain shots - but only if the camera decided it wanted to. I'm not sure how much override function there was to force it into various settings.

All of the subsequent (Panasonic Lumix) replacements have been a bit of a let down - even though they get great reviews elsewhere.

I hear great things about those tiny Sony RX100s, but are they available now for sub £100?
 
Last edited:
There's a big problem with this thread : the OP wants to spend a TINY amount of money AND wants something that fits in a pocket.
 
To be honest if you understand photography and have vision then any camera can be a professional camera. Essentially the body just saves the photo. Look at video camera such as a RED. They cost ££££££. This is because their data capture ability. Same with a phone vs a camera body. The main thing which sets it all apart is the lenses. They add more tone and drama depending what you use. So go and buy some old 12mp DSLR and get a nifty 50 for it. Learn to make you images look professional on that and spot what is missing.
 
blueboxpotter said:
Hello, I am new to photography. I've taken photos on a smartphone and I've taken photos with a small camera. But I don't have a lot of experience. I don't want to pay more than £100 for a camera right now, as I'm a beginner. I would like a small digital camera that might fit in my pocket for £30 to £50. Can I still shoot professional images with a beginner camera, or will I require a more sophisticated camera?
Click to expand...
Your question, by the way it is written indicates you are at the beginning point of your photography life. As has been often stated in so many words, you make the photo not the camera. The camera is only the tool you use to record the scene you see. This is not meant to diminish the camera's importance nor your understanding how to best use it. Both are very important. However, I am wondering if you know that the choice of camera is not the beginning point of photography. The beginning point of photography is you. How does the photographer see? That is the beginning point. He/she does not simply see as anyone else does. He/she sees in a very unique way. So, the beginning point for photography is the same as it would be for a painter. How to see is the beginning point.

I would suggest that you set your question about what camera and how much to spend aside for the moment. Rather concentrate on learning how to see as a photographer. Where to learn that? The same place a painter learns it. In a beginning class on painting. Learn such things as lines of perspective, center point, balance, rule of thirds, color vs black and white use, use of shadow, use of darkness and light, etc. Until you learn to see as a photographer or painter should you will be a snap shooter rather than a professional forever no matter what camera you use. Remember, the eye behind the camera is a trained eye. Not just any eye will do.
 
Last edited:
Professor1991 said:
So instead of improving my photography, I should just start charging people and by definition, my photos will be "Professional" ?
Click to expand...
Getting paid is one definition which probably comes from sports, i.e. professional vs amateur sport.

There only used to be 3 professions (no not that one :) ) Vicar, Doctor and Lawyer because they "profess" an oath as part of becoming qualified. In my world professional engineers are generally considered to be those who have gained chartership with a recognised institution as opposed to say the technician who fixes your washing machine and calls themselves an engineer. So I would say professional is more than "getting paid" it means having appropriate training and agreeing to certain standards of practice.
 
sirch said:
Getting paid is one definition which probably comes from sports, i.e. professional vs amateur sport.
>< snipped.
Click to expand...
Well yes but ... professionals were rather looked down on compared to the amateur sportsmen :D:exit:
 
Last edited:
sirch said:
Getting paid is one definition which probably comes from sports, i.e. professional vs amateur sport.

There only used to be 3 professions (no not that one :) ) Vicar, Doctor and Lawyer because they "profess" an oath as part of becoming qualified. In my world professional engineers are generally considered to be those who have gained chartership with a recognised institution as opposed to say the technician who fixes your washing machine and calls themselves an engineer. So I would say professional is more than "getting paid" it means having appropriate training and agreeing to certain standards of practice.
Click to expand...
In your field that’d be correct.
But in the field of photography, your point about sport is relevant.
I know lots of ‘runners’, ‘cyclists’, ‘guitarists’, photographers’, ‘footballers’ and ‘potters’.
Those are all pastimes, or hobbies, however, if one of those footballers or photographers make their living playing football or taking pictures, then that’d be the difference between amateur and professional.
A completely different set of criteria to an accountant, based on a completely different premise.
 
Qlina said:
I've been taken outside and been given a good kicking :(
Click to expand...
Как очень интересно, но не в хорошем смысле :mad:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Reported Sphexx's post that quoted the original Cyrillic because it still has the email addy showing.
 
Nod said:
Reported Sphexx's post that quoted the original Cyrillic because it still has the email addy showing.
Click to expand...
You’re probably right. I broke my own “rule” of not replying to spammers etc. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
The person takes the image not the camera, as for professional, depends on what this means, if we are assuming its a paid for image and the clients is happy, the gear is irrelevant.
If its for personal use and your using the word professional as a sign of quality, then don't bother it is your image and other peoples opinions will just give you a headache.

14 years and we have NEVER ONCE been asked what cameras we use. however we couldn't do what we do with a £100 camera :)
 
Studio488commercial said:
The person takes the image not the camera, as for professional, depends on what this means, if we are assuming its a paid for image and the clients is happy, the gear is irrelevant.
If its for personal use and your using the word professional as a sign of quality, then don't bother it is your image and other peoples opinions will just give you a headache.

14 years and we have NEVER ONCE been asked what cameras we use. however we couldn't do what we do with a £100 camera :)
Click to expand...
Or maybe it’s the world:
"A photograph is not created by a photographer. What they do is just to open a little window and capture it. The world then writes itself on the film. The act of the photographer is closer to reading than it is to writing. They are the readers of the world." – Ferdinando Scianna
https://shop.magnumphotos.com/produ...rdinando-scianna-print?variant=28363655872599
:):):)
 
the word professional has nothing to do with being paid. It is how. You cope and how you act, when things work and also when things don’t work.
the fact that if you are getting paid £600 they would not expect a £300 compact camera , even if the photographer was the best in the world. It is more important to conduct yourself professionally. I have alwats said , that a mediocre camera in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing , would produce better results than someone who doesn’t with the best camera in the world
 
Assuming you want "great image quality", and a significant step up from phone cam quality, you could buy a poor-condition used Sony NEX for about £30, a manual lens adapter for £5, and a reasonable old 50mm f2 for about £10 (with a bit of luck and patience). Although the set up will be pretty small, you will need a large pocket!
 
I have worked with some people who where getting paid , and they where far from professional in the way they acted. and also with people who wearnt being paid and the acted professionally.
so being paid doesn't make a professional , its part of it
 
Last edited:
Professional....doint what you are doing to pay the bills...not as a top class hobbiest!!

i think it comes down to how large your original can be enlarged before the downsides of your camera sensor and lens quality can deliver
nothwithstanding correct exposure, composition, and sharpness
i think you can get a lot of interest in your shots here via the forum inputs...but may not be able to sell for commercial use
none of mine can!!
cheers
geof
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top