Equipment and tog career

EMA747

EMA747

Messages
2,070
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
I am currently thinking of trying to make a go of a career in photography as I have just been turned down from a job I applied to due to some health issues.
My question is about equipment rather than tog careers though. (that's a whole other thread :D)

If I am serious about trying to make a go of it is having the best equipment I can get a good idea? Right now I have a 7D and a 1DmkIII neither of which I am convinced produce as good an image as I am looking for. Again I don't really want to get into a discussion of this as I have another thread about that here http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=238548.

I am currently thinking I might try and sell the 7D and 1DmkIII and put in some extra money and get a 1DmkIV body. I already have L glass so I don't need new lenses right now. My thinking is that getting a top of the range body now is a good idea as it will produce good images but also future-proof me for a good few years.

Does this sound like a sound idea or not?
 
Does this sound like a sound idea or not?
Click to expand...

I have to say not. Both those bodies are more than capable of producing salable quality files.

If you're going to make a go of this it's so important that you understand and beleive it's you people are paying for and not the camera.
 
both of those bodies are DEFINITELY good enough. Professionals 5 years ago would have clubbed you to death with a monopod for the AF of the 7D (2 years later, they'd have just bought the nikon D3 ;) ).

You DO, however, need new lenses...
your lenses are almost certainly not a suitable set for professional photography (which is largely pictures of people. not that many exceptions.). Seeing as this thread is about gear... 100-400 is pretty useless for shooting people, and the 17-40 f4 is too slow for most event/reportage type work. F2.8, all along the spectrum of lengths, is where it's at. The standard is a wide-> normal zoom 2.8, tele zoom 2.8, and additional lenses as required (85 1.8, macro, ultrawide, supertelephotos). Both your cameras are fine.
 
IMHO it depends on what your thinking of shooting... weddings portraits news... kit much depends on what for
 
Your career needs to be based around a sound business plan and knowledge of what you are shooting. The kit in the bag follows on from both of the above.
 
AliB said:
Your career needs to be based around a sound business plan and knowledge of what you are shooting. The kit in the bag follows on from both of the above.
Click to expand...
I agree I need to sort the business side of things, that's the really hard part I guess.

As for what I would be shooting - I'm afraid my main interests and knowledge are in pretty hard areas to sell from what I can gather. I am interesting in shooting mainly "mechanical" type subjects, ie aviation, railways, shipping etc, as these things I have a lifelong interest in, a fair amout of knowledge of and have some lose contacts in the aviation industry. I am also keen on motor sport and travel photography.
I have been mulling the idea of a career in photography over for a couple of years (well I've always wanted to do something with photography since I did it at A-level 10 years ago but other things have got in the way until now.) so it's not a flash in the pan idea. Saying that I am still not quite at the stage of looking into a full business plan.
 
schizophonic said:
Remember its the photographer that takes the good photos and not the equipment.
Click to expand...

is a very nice thing to say if you don't need to regularly take professional quality photos to order, of anything, in any situation or working conditions, and if you screw up, you're in trouble...
 
I certainly think you have far better things to spend money on than upgrading either of those cameras. I shoot with a pair of 7Ds, and they are ideal for what I use them for.

As already said you need a business plan, and part of that needs to be an assessment of start up costs you are going to incur. Once you really start thinking about this there are lots of cost that aren't at all related to photography, such as banking, credit card, stationary, accounting, marketing, etc.

You should also be asking whether everything you spend is going to help you make money, either directly or indirectly, and whether it will pay for itself. Given the cost of a 1DIV I can't think of many areas of photography where you will make enough sales that you wouldn't have made with your current kit to justify the expense.
 
itsdavedotnet said:
is a very nice thing to say if you don't need to regularly take professional quality photos to order, of anything, in any situation or working conditions, and if you screw up, you're in trouble...
Click to expand...

Thats not 100% true. I've seen some very special pictures that are taken with a 40D or even a 350D. Even with people these days spending $$$ on high end equipment - they dont know how to use utilise half the features or what to do, they just leave it on auto.
 
schizophonic said:
Thats not 100% true. I've seen some very special pictures that are taken with a 40D or even a 350D. .
Click to expand...

But those cameras couldnt take the same pictures I take with mine... not at indoor sports or under poor floodlights... so your argument (your side of debate) doesnt really hold any water i am afraid :)
 
Someone posted here a short time ago that he was refused a togging job as the equipment he owned was regarded by the Picture Editor as being 'too amateur'...

Unfortunately, owning 'Pro' (read 'expensive') kit says a lot to prospective employers about your committment to the job...

...regardless of the imagery you can produce with lower-spec equipment.
 
Arkady said:
Someone posted here a short time ago that he was refused a togging job as the equipment he owned was regarded by the Picture Editor as being 'too amateur'...

Unfortunately, owning 'Pro' (read 'expensive') kit says a lot to prospective employers about your committment to the job...

...regardless of the imagery you can produce with lower-spec equipment.
Click to expand...
That's kind of what I was thinking might be the case. I'm sure it's essential to have a camera that won't be stopped by challenging situtaions too.


Another thing I was thinking was would it not be better to sell the 1D and 7D while the second hand prices (of the 7D at least) are still quite high? If 6-12 months down the line I find I want a 1DmkIV then the 7D will be worth far less and I will have to add a much bigger chunk of money to it. Used mkIVs won't be on the market for ages I assume.
 
the 1D3 is still used by professionals all over the world, and the 7D is better in many ways than the 1D3... can't see there being an issue there that the 1D4 would solve, and certainly wouldn't be worth the expense of a 1D4.

all of this is completely secondary without a business plan or aim for the area that you want to work in, and knowledge of the industry though.
 
I wouldn't sell two cameras to buy one. If you are turning pro you will need at least two bodies and two of most things.
 
itsdavedotnet said:
can't see there being an issue there that the 1D4 would solve, and certainly wouldn't be worth the expense of a 1D4.
Click to expand...

really? well I had two mkIII and i now have 1 mkIII and 1 mkIV .. Only if i need two bodies at once (regulal) do i use the mkIII otherwise everything is on the mkIV as its far superior.. as for your other rather bemusing comment.. the iso range on the mkIV is alone worth the added expense if you do low light or difficult lighting..

certainly strange advice from someone who it seems doesnt even own said cameras ?:)
 
KIPAX said:
really? well I had two mkIII and i now have 1 mkIII and 1 mkIV .. Only if i need two bodies at once (regulal) do i use the mkIII otherwise everything is on the mkIV as its far superior.. as for your other rather bemusing comment.. the iso range on the mkIV is alone worth the added expense if you do low light or difficult lighting..

certainly strange advice from someone who it seems doesnt even own said cameras ?:)
Click to expand...

i think that's not the point he was trying to make . the OP imho shouldn't worry that much as III and 7d are enough to suit a starting tog. unless he used to be well known film director.
 
Starastin said:
i think that's not the point he was trying to make . the OP imho shouldn't worry that much as III and 7d are enough to suit a starting tog. unless he used to be well known film director.
Click to expand...

I agree with that,... i dont agree with the comments that there isnt much difference between a mkIII and a mkIV
 
Starastin said:
i think that's not the point he was trying to make . the OP imho shouldn't worry that much as III and 7d are enough to suit a starting tog. unless he used to be well known film director.
Click to expand...

yup, this was what I meant. Didn't mean that there's no difference between the bodies, of course there is - more that a starting out photographer in these times wouldn't want to put themselves in 10k of debt on two bodies when starting out.

Anyway, as I said earlier, the whole point is moot - OP, you need to research the fields of photography that you have skills and portfolio in, research commercial outlets and how you can even start to pay the bills in that field. Photos of anything other than people will be significantly more difficult in this respect, but doable. Get a copy of the freelance handbook, gives a good idea of the range of potential photo buyers and editors out there, and what they want.
 
itsdavedotnet said:
yup, this was what I meant. Didn't mean that there's no difference between the bodies, of course there is - more that a starting out photographer in these times wouldn't want to put themselves in 10k of debt on two bodies when starting out.

Anyway, as I said earlier, the whole point is moot - OP, you need to research the fields of photography that you have skills and portfolio in, research commercial outlets and how you can even start to pay the bills in that field. Photos of anything other than people will be significantly more difficult in this respect, but doable. Get a copy of the freelance handbook, gives a good idea of the range of potential photo buyers and editors out there, and what they want.
Click to expand...
That's good advice, thanks. :)

I should maybe also say that I would be doing photography alongside my current part-time job to start with. I also don't have any mortgage, rent, dependants etc to worry about so that leaves me a little bit more free in terms of what I need to earn from the start. I'm not saying I have much spare cash at the moment (I don't :'() but it means I don't need to be earning 1000s of pounds straight away. First few years would probably be spent getting experience of commercial photography as well as getting contacts and then using some of the money to invest back into equipment and the business side of it.
 
Sorry for bringing this thread back from the dead but other things have come up.
I might be going on a charity cycle tour this summer or next and need to put about a grand or just over aside for that. (not good I know if I am trying to start making some £s off my photography :bonk:)

I think it comes down to the fact that one of my cameras will have to go. I'm just so undecided which one out of the 7D and the 1DmkIII. They both seem to have pluses and minuses.

Any ideas which one I should sell? Are my plans to begin the process of trying to make money from my photography a deciding factor or are both bodies up to the job? :shrug:
 
Have you got a 3rd body? If not if you are going to be making a living from photography i'd say you be better keeping both the cameras (unless you have another backup body and you can get away with selling one of the two mentioned above).
I know if I was ever going to do it (which i'm not), I would want atleast 2 camera that were up to the job incase anything went wrong with one on a shoot.
 
I see what you are saying but at the moment I really don't have the cash to keep both.

Is a second body really that important? I mean I'm only just thinking about starting to earn any money for my work at the moment. I've been photographing for 5+ years but never thought about the business side of things. Is a second body something I need right now or more something I should be buying when I start to find some actual regular work?
 
I wouldn't see how a one off paid job or a regular amount would affect it. If you turn up at ANY job and your camera plays up, well you are pretty much ****** if you don't have a 2nd body. Also means you don't need to change lens all the time.
 
If you know anything about business, you ought to know that there comes a point (sometimes more often than you might want) where you have to take a plunge. Decide now which is more important to you and take the appropriate action. So, is getting your photography career going more or less important than a charity cycle ride? You are well on your way to having the resources (in terms of cameras) for a viable photography career, are you going to set yourself back for the sake of a charity?

Help yourself before you help others or you'll be the one receiving help from charities and the tax man ;)
 
I would sack the charity thing off. Everyone is doing stuff for charity at the moment its costing me a fortune sponsoring people, business is slow I don't really have the spare cash but saying no to someone is very difficult.

Spending a grand to do something for charity is a joke, sorry but that is way over the top and it will cost you far more that you will raise, you may as well just give your spare cash to the charity and save yourself all the time, effort and embarrassment asking everyone you know to sponsor you doing what ever you have planned.

You are currently working have next to no outgoings you should have plenty of spare cash but you don't so why the hell would you consider spending £1000 on doing something for charity? £100 yeah OK but only as long as you raise more than that, its like all those doing parachute jumps £250 or what ever it costs they usually raise about that doing it and risk injuries which do happen more often than not.

You need to be thinking about yourself, your career and your future, selling your cameras either or both is not thinking about your career even if you plan to replace them with something else more expensive without really knowing what type of photography you want to get in to as sports your best with say a D or the 1D3, portrait the 5D2 the 7D is probably the best compromise with the AF performance.

Just my thoughts, hey I'm doing a charity thing next weekend I'm doing the 3 peaks if you want to sponsor me ;) actually thats a joke, I'm only doing the driving for a few mates they are doing it for charity. The drive is the harder part BTW I did it at the begining of June.
 
The cycle ride thing is not just a one off thing for charity. I go cycle touring a lot but need money to get a new bike/tent etc and pay for the actual trip (if it happens).

But I totally see your point about putting the money into a photography career plan.

I also need a lot more money for more glass as I lack a lot of mid range reach at the moment. It's obvious I know but I'm finding what you can get by on in terms of a hobby (ie my current 100-400L and 17-40L) just isn't enough when trying to go pro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top