Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But an honest and accurate knob David
Pros don't use primes
- Thread starter jamiebonline
- Start date
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
Can I have a amateur 800mm lens please that will take "good" sports or bird shots ....... or even a nice 400mm f2.8 that will do the trick
My bird shots were really "distant" with my 50mm f1.8 and the images were really crap, even my mother didn't like them ....... some were difficult to identify .... then I bought a 300mm lens and they came nearer and I discovered the bird on the chimney over there wasn't a weather vain ......... they came nearer still when I added a TC20Elll ..................my "crap" bird shots with the 50mm f1.8 ....... suddenly became better ........... I didn't really change
My bird shots were really "distant" with my 50mm f1.8 and the images were really crap, even my mother didn't like them ....... some were difficult to identify .... then I bought a 300mm lens and they came nearer and I discovered the bird on the chimney over there wasn't a weather vain ......... they came nearer still when I added a TC20Elll ..................my "crap" bird shots with the 50mm f1.8 ....... suddenly became better ........... I didn't really change
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
Bodies are always "loss leaders" ....... the prices of pro long Nikon and Canon lenses have increased substantially over the past few years
Even the new Nikon 300mm f4 lens is 70% more expensive than the lens it will repace
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Dunno why everyone's getting their knickers in a twist here.... you use the correct tools for the job. Obviously if you need a 800mm lens to shoot something far away, then that's what you buy.
RedRobin
Dances With Dogs
- Messages
- 9,314
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
....You might have good intentions in "helping" amateurs in this way but to claim that camera gear primarily designed for and bought by professionals cannot possibly improve amateurs' photography simply isn't true. I am one of many living examples : My Canon 7D Mark II has already improved my photography as did my 70D over a 100D and if I bought a 1DX it would enable me even further. My Canon 100-400mm L II enables me to reach my potential more easily than either my Canon 400mm or 300mm L primes (now sold to help fund the new zoom).
As I said before (which some here choose to ignore) such 'professional' camera gear does not guarantee better results but it offers more opportunity to grow into higher standards (whilst making some binnable efforts on the way of course!).
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No David, consumer/prosumer gear aimed at the masses is cheaper, and thats because they want you to buy cheap to hook you in then hope you get gear snobbery and GAS (as many do) and upgrade to the expensive stuff while all the time you're still taking s*** photos (not you personally)
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
I disagree. Factor in inflation and pro gear is cheaper now than it's ever been.
How exactly has it improved your photography?
Going back through my receipts, and factoring in inflation, pro gear is way cheaper than it was 10 or 15 years ago.
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
As I have often said David, as far as I am concerned expensive equipment has made my images better, in that I cannot take some of them without this equipment.
I am probably the same photographer ........ but this equipment has made my images "better" ...... because of the subjects that I am interested in
Equipment does matter (to me)
Last edited:
RedRobin
Dances With Dogs
- Messages
- 9,314
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
....Sorry but you are sounding a bit naive. What is "an acceptable profit" is in the vast majority of cases the maximum profit.
The selling of larger volumes of product does, as you rightly say, "allow" retail prices to be dropped but who does that? It's competition which usually influences prices.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Exactly.... without a 800mm lens you CAN'T take the images you do... so you're a poor example here. The type of photography you do is equipment dependent... not skill dependent.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Argue all you like... it IS cheaper.. just been going through receipts and once you factor in inflation, the (equivalent) gear I bought over a decade ago is between 15 and 20% cheaper now.
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
it's not easy to use a 600mm prime even if you are reasonable skilful, you need a certain level of skill, an 800mm is even more difficult ..............I think that bird photography is certainly skill dependant .......... as much as any other subject
levels of skill do vary ....... I'm not saying I'm skilful just that my bird images are better
don't wish to argue as you seem to be supporting a number of "fronts"
No inflation over the last few years - the 400mm f2.8 has rocketed in price -------- overtime Nikon and Canon replace a (long) prime the push the price up significantly
Last edited:
odd jim
Flimsiest Lambresta
- Messages
- 9,209
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
I can, I can use one of those "bridge" cameras ... I've tried ..... the images are "sh1t" compared with say my 300mm f2.8 VR +TC's
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Exactly.... that's because that type of photography is gear dependent, not skill dependent.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I bought my frst D3S brand new in 2010 for about £2800 if i remember correctly, i bought it along with a Nikon 400mm f/2.8 for £4,600
Today the equivilant gear, a D4S costs £,4500 and the 400mm f/2.8 £10,400
Hardly in line with inflation
The camera has risen over 55% and the lens about the same while inflation has gone up no more than 5-10% in the same period
RedRobin
Dances With Dogs
- Messages
- 9,314
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
....Moving from Canon 100D to 70D to 7D Mark II has improved my photography as follows (not in any order of importance) :
- My bird in-flight images are better exposed, often sharper, and I have increased my hit rate due to more sophisticated autofocus/tracking options. My skills at capturing such images have been improved.
- I now have more options such as not having to be so concerned about weather conditions (other than the quality of light of course).
- The combination of a more sophisticated camera body and more advanced latest-state-of-the-art lenses offer me the opportunities to try to improve my skills.
- Now having camera body customisable options again offers me more opportunity to improve my skills.
- Canon L lenses perform better than Canon 'ordinary' lenses.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
better gear can allow you to take better photos but it doesnt make you a better photographer
Case in point, i first started shooting pro sports with a D300 and Sigma 70-200mm, some great images in good light, however my frst time under floodlights and maxing out the ISO and even under exposing meant a shutter speed of around 1/100th sec resulting in grainy mush, an upgrade to a D3S and 400mm f/2.8 meant better photos but not a better photographer, that came with time and experience, some say it never came LOL
Case in point, i first started shooting pro sports with a D300 and Sigma 70-200mm, some great images in good light, however my frst time under floodlights and maxing out the ISO and even under exposing meant a shutter speed of around 1/100th sec resulting in grainy mush, an upgrade to a D3S and 400mm f/2.8 meant better photos but not a better photographer, that came with time and experience, some say it never came LOL
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
I paid £1275 for Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 in 2009. That's equivalent to £1590 today. Today's retail price for that lens is around 1200.
in 2009 the D700 was a little over £2000 retail. That's £2478 today.... a D810 is around £2200.
A Nikkor 14-24 f2.8 was the same price in pounds in 2009 as it is now. So in 2009 it was the equivalent of £1735
All the gear I'M buying is cheaper (shrug).
OK.. birds... yes. That requires little skill from the photographer though. The camera is definitely helping you here, but that's always something that's gear dependent, and nothing to do with you. You're not a better photographer.
How do they offer you opportunities?
No.. it makes it easier for you... not improve your skills.
Neither here nor there... How good a photo is is not really measured by being marginally sharper or not.. unless we're talking camera club competitions here.
Non of this is making you a better photographer. Your gear is allowing technically better images, sure, but do anything that requires creativity, and you'll find it avails you nothing. With bird images.. it's all about the gear. Anyone with the right gear can get impressive looking images as the camera is doing everything for you.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Those weren't launch prices.. that gear had been out a couple of years by then.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
David, stick the D700 figure of £2000 into the inflation calculator here http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...tion-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html select the year, 2009 and it gives you the value in todays terms, it comes out at £2.383 which makes the D810 cheaper by about £100 compared to 6 years ago taking inflation into account
Your figure for the 14-24mm is also about £200 out as well
Its not inflation which is making things more expensive, its manufacturers greed
Last edited:
- Messages
- 6,408
- Edit My Images
- No
Depends how far back you go, I brought a a Nikon F4s for about 2.5k in the mid 80s.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That surely depends on the technology, the market, the tech and wether or not it's pioneering at the time, i paid £700 for a JVC video recorder almost 30 years ago
- Messages
- 2,249
- Edit My Images
- No
Isn't it also due to the currency weakening?
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
The only way to compare them is in the Yen prices ...... but all these multinationals mess around with transfer pricing etc., especially in the US and Euro markets
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Whose currency and compared to whose, the Pound has strengthened 12% against the Yen in the last year alone and the Yen is on a major slide against the Dollar and the Dollar is on a slide against the Pound
All of which can and does only point to Japanese manufacturers keeping prices high
Last edited:
- Messages
- 12,706
- Edit My Images
- No
I suspect that's one of the reasons why these "grey importers" can offer such a good deal - they are obviously buying in local currency and selling in converted £'s at current exchange rates ....... whereas Nikon stick to (old exchange rate) fixed UK prices, (if you see what I mean) and never drop them even though the £ strengthens
Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,284
- Edit My Images
- No
Have a look at the 'professional equipment' David Burnett uses...
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnL24q11oEU
Steve.
Steve.
- Messages
- 2,249
- Edit My Images
- No
I meant Sterling against other currencies, my point was if you're comparing prices from something like 5+ years ago you may be doing it when Sterling was at its strongest against other currencies and as it's weakened things have gotten more expensive.
It's not a quick process but saying that I'm not clear on how companies actually figure out their pricing structures around different currencies.
Les McLean
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,793
- Name
- Les
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Lenses have definitely got cheaper over the years, even without inflation factored in, I've got a Practical Photography magazine from March 2002 in front of me, I compared the prices at Warehouse Express from 2002 against present WEX, of some Canon lenses that are the same now as then, they are significantly cheaper now.
Last edited:
RedRobin
Dances With Dogs
- Messages
- 9,314
- Name
- Robin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
....@Pookeyhead David ^^^^ This is what I have been trying to tell you!
- Messages
- 6,408
- Edit My Images
- No
....@Pookeyhead David ^^^^ This is what I have been trying to tell you!
You could take an image with a disc camera, the 110 would be better quality. The 35mm would visually be of a better quality, 120mm however would eclipse it, you would see another marked improvement using 5x4 but in comparison the 10 x 8 is superior.
Confidence comes from knowing your camera, and it's abilities, fully understanding the ISO, Aperture and speed ratios and knowing when and how to apply this knowledge. You could take a photograph with a 10 x 8 Sinar the quality of the image would be sublime. But if you don't understand the exposure ratio or Scheimpflug principle snd know when to apply it you're going to be screwed.
Owning a professional camera does not or should not make you feel any more confident or a better photographer. Yes it can improve the quality of your output (final) image but that's only a tiny part of the story.
Having that knowledge helps but if you've got a good eye for a subject then great images can be taken on an auto point and shoot. It's not the camera but the photographer who takes it. Ten people could look at an image 5 may like it, the other 5 may hate it !
Last edited:
- Messages
- 25,332
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I suppose where people get their confidence from is a personal thing. But I've happily shot jobs on gear that the equipment forums tell me is completely unsuitable, it's not restricted my ability in any way. in fact the only restriction I personally feel is caused by my lack of talent.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
A long time ago part of my Job was to get gear ready for jobs,let just say their was some less than pro gear i had to give out,as long as i made sure it was working,that's what their had to to do the job with
- Messages
- 7,931
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When you turn up at a location, what ever is going on, Carrying a camera or not, they know if you are a Professional in seconds.
- Messages
- 5,864
- Edit My Images
- No
1) you can only buy 4 primes for the price of a 24-70 if you're buying cheap primes. Cheap primes are sharp but make worse pictures than expensive primes. The pictures look noticeably different. Especially when you shoot into the sun a lot.
2) I don't care what people think of how big my camera is
3) That said, my 200mm f2 prime does tend to draw attention
4) who'd want to use a horrible slow aperture like f2.8 unless they really really had to because they needed a zoom?
5) if you can't change primes within a few seconds then you need more practice
6) I need my zooms to be able to do some of the fast moving or limited kit access jobs that people pay me to shoot
7) I wish I could sell my zooms.
2) I don't care what people think of how big my camera is
3) That said, my 200mm f2 prime does tend to draw attention
4) who'd want to use a horrible slow aperture like f2.8 unless they really really had to because they needed a zoom?
5) if you can't change primes within a few seconds then you need more practice
6) I need my zooms to be able to do some of the fast moving or limited kit access jobs that people pay me to shoot
7) I wish I could sell my zooms.