"The photographer with the better gear will take the better images" - Opinions?

[alexniedra]

I have seen many people say that the photographer with better gear will take the better picture.


What do you think of this statement?



I personally think that this is bogus.



Think of a 5D II and a 70-200 2.8 IS in the hands of a fool, who sets the camera on full-auto mode (I'm not condemning full-auto, just the use of a 5D only in full auto), and has no idea what Av, Tv, or M means. I would believe that the image quality will be well, far better than a consumer body/lens combination. But many people overlook the things that make photography what it is.


To me, a good photographer is a person with both technical knowledge and skill, along with plenty of creative thinking. I don't believe that better gear directly influences the overall photographic skill of the photographer. What I do believe is that good gear can capture good scenes. Talent and knowledge, on the other hand, capture great moments.


I also fear that many photographers, who are new to the DSLR scene, feel pressured into buying more advanced gear in the hopes of making themselves better photographers.





Thoughts?

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

I have seen many people say that the photographer with better gear will take the better picture.

I hate to say itbut I agree. However, the phrase should be "The photographer with the right gear will take the better picture"


No matter how great aprofessional bird photographer is, if he's armed with a 14mm prime, it's going tobe hard for him. A rich amature with a 800 f/5.6L will have more keepers than the professional in this case.


No matter how great a wedding photographers is, if he's armed with only super telephotos, it's going to be hard for him also.

[alexniedra]

Very true.



And I should have thought about my opinion a little more carefully:


To me, the photographer makes the picture - not the gear. When I take a good picture and show my friends, they look at my 40D and give me a look of "Well, you do have that nice camera".



That sounds a little better.


What you said is totally true, and I agree. Do you agree with my new idea?

[ShutterbugJohan]

<style><!--

--></style>

<div>
<style><!--

--></style>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial;"]A photographer once went to a friend's house for dinner. He
brought along a few prints of his photos; his friend "ooh"ed and "ahh"ed over
them for a few minutes. "You must have a great camera!" he said. After dinner,
the photographer was preparing to leave. "Thanks for the deliciousdinner!" he
said. "You must have someawesome pans!" </div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>

the phrase should be "The photographer with the right gear will take the better picture"


No matter how great aprofessional bird photographer is, if he's armed with a 14mm prime, it's going tobe hard for him. A rich amature with a 800 f/5.6L will have more keepers than the professional in this case.


No matter how great a wedding photographers is, if he's armed with only super telephotos, it's going to be hard for him also.

</div>
<div>I agree.
</div>

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

I think this is a good article http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/cameras-matter.shtml

[alexniedra]

Thanks - I enjoyed reading this.


Equipment matters, but talent is necessary. If it wasn't, then people wouldn't be getting paid thousands of dollars to press bottons and point cameras all day.

[peety3]

Perhaps the right statement is the photographer with better gear can take the better picture. The photographer with a point &amp; shoot can't duplicate the thin depth-of-field that a DSLR and a fast prime can capture. Doesn't mean that the photographer with the right gear would have settings dialed in to capture that, but the P&amp;S can't do it.

[Dallasphotog]

This one is a little complex.


I have an XT, XTi, 1DMKII and the new 5DMKII. Two weekends ago, one of my best shots at the state soccer playoffs came off the XT wearing the EF24-70mm f/2.8L. I had the EF400mm F/2.8L on the 1DMKII and was dropping it to shoot close-ups with the XT. So, I can see the point that gear isn't everything. The old, slow, unsophisticated XT, can still pop out plenty nice images.


On the other hand, I shot volleyball indoors today and used the 5DMKII jacked up to ISO-H1 (12,300). I got shots that none of my other cameras could duplicate, ever. Without the noise handling and high ISO performance of the 5DMKII, none of my shots would have been possible.


Is there pressure to buy expensive gear; especially for working pros? Yes. Does it make a difference in some instances? Yes.


If you want to really talk about image quality that can't be duplicated, start looking at the shots off the EF300 F/2.8L and the EF400 F/2.8L. Those lenses might make make a blind photographer look good.

[Keith B]

I know a girl, all she shoots with is a 30D and a Fisheye 15 2.8 lens. She has used that set up for a few years. She started out with that set up to shoot skate pics. Since she couldn't afford all different lenses she just shot everything with the fish. She takes a pretty good pic.


My point is, she knows her gear really well and she has developed a style.


Use what you got, get good with it. Develop a style and just be you.


People will seek out your style, not your gear.

[SRPHOTO]

Use what you got, get good with it. Develop a style and just be you.


People will seek out your style, not your gear.

Spot on.