I't not the camera it's the photographer that counts (Page 9): I haven't read all 8 pages, so apologies if I'm repeating somebody else's take on this. I think the purpose of the above...

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Rongnongno wrote:

....WHY do we say that it's not the camera but the photographer?

When will we finally admit that a good photographer will produce better work using the proper tools as with every other professionals?

I haven't read all 8 pages, so apologies if I'm repeating somebody else's take on this.

I think the purpose of the above saying is to remind us of which skills are the most important in photography. It's reminding us that being able to achieve technically good pictures is not the most important skill to have.

The above saying is suggesting that the most important skills are those to do with visualising, and being able to capture the visual and emotional (or atmospheric) elements of a scene.

The saying is not suggesting that technical excellence is not relevant or important - it's just saying that technical excellence is not the be-all and end-all of picture-taking.

Apologies again if I'm repeating what somebody else has said.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

ocbeyer wrote:

I find it an interesting exercise to go to website... (show quote)

:thumbup:

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

charryl wrote:

I agree. It is in the eye of the beholder. As to snob? You don't know me nor have you seen the pictures to which I am referring.

Sorry, Charryl! It was really not meant for you, possibly tongue in! cheek. When I saw it in print, I regretted saying it, the snob part, and what you say is correct. I don't know you and haven't seen the pics you referred to. Please accept my apology and I'll try to be more careful with my comments. Being an artist, I've had people ask me what art they should collect for themselves. Answer is always, collect the art you like, or would enjoy being surrounded by! It is as in pictures, in the eye of the beholder!

Alan1729 Loc: England UK, now New York State.

Bamboo wrote:

Delderby wrote:
"A good photographer will produce better results with poor equipment than a poor photographer with good equipment."

I'll drink to that.

Me too, need a drink after reading this thread.

kalena

[quote=Rongnongno]

When will we finally admit that a good photographer will produce better work using the proper tools as with every other professionals?

Thank you. I get tired of "It's not the camera."

My Canon Xti was a great camera in broad daylight, but it really fell down on low light captures. There was a lot of noise, and my beloved little camera couldn't record anything like realistic color in low light. So, what, I must be a lousy photographer? I can expose properly all I want, but I can't put extra color on the sensor. (Then there are people who believe one shouldn't use postprocessing.)

Recently I looked at photos from a trip to the Canadian Rockies from 2005. On that trip, I'd finally given in to digital and used my husband's old Canon 10D. I was sorely disappointed when none of the glowing colors or striking contrasts showed up in my photos, and basically never looked at them again. Now, after years of experience with PS and Nik filters, I fixed them to adequately express the beauty I saw.

I can't wait for cameras to be equal to the human eye. I wouldn't be able to afford one, but maybe I can rent one. :)

bunuweld Loc: Arizona

Rongnongno wrote:

Let me challenge that a bit. br br First off if y... (show quote)

>>>>Then WHY do we say that it's not the camera but the photographer? Is it because photography is subjective or is it because we want to pass for good photographer while using imperfect if not shitty cameras?>>>>

Answer: It is both the camera and the photographer.

>>>...The only thing that is true: Give the best tools to an idiot and you will have idiotic results. Is the statement more the reflection of 'camera' envy' than anything else?">>>>

Answer: Not so.The idiot setting the camera on Auto will get better results with a better camera than with an inferior camera also on Auto even if these results only become evident with magnifying the picture or a cropped portion of it.

LaughBrian Loc: Tn

Delderby wrote:

A good photographer will produce better results with poor equipment than a poor photographer with good equipment.
I think this thread is stupid.

some people on here need to feel they are special. your gear will play a big role in the outcome of any pic. thats a simple fact that some cant get over. the camera pro is a shrinking market. with the new point and shoots cell phones with awesome cameras. this thread will bring out the ones who think there special. this will be fun to watch, even the fact that this is spose to be a forum for people to lean on, there are many here who think that they are better and dont come here to help.

Shutter Bugger

Rongnongno wrote:

And mac giver can save the world. Great reasoning.

You are missing the point completely or perhaps you are not but enjoy stirring the shit as you put it so well.

The lack of proper tools prevents everyone to do the best that can be done.

Self made tools? Please. That is BS.

I made this decades ago: A "Flywheel Puller" for a 50HP Blue Band Mercury Outboard Motor. It worked so well
I added extra holes and have used it as a Puller for other applications.

It is just one of numerous tools I've made over the years.

I've made the picture downloadable so you can get a nice close look at it.

That kinda proves the BS around here is your posts bud... :thumbup:

Harvey Loc: Pioneer, CA

Gosh why didn't you just order one from Mercury for $199 + s&h and wait 6 weeks for delivery in stead of making this from "stuff" laying around your shop in about 1 hr and getting the job done the same day. Well I think I have done the same by ordering camera "stuff" from Amazon instead of Canon.

Shutter Bugger wrote:

I made this decades ago: A "Flywheel Puller" for a 50HP Blue Band Mercury Outboard Motor. It worked so well
I added extra holes and have used it as a Puller for other applications.

It is just one of numerous tools I've made over the years.

I've made the picture downloadable so you can get a nice close look at it.

That kinda proves the BS around here is your posts bud... :thumbup:

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Shutter Bugger

jerryc41 wrote:

All things being equal, a better camera will give you a better picture. Can an expert take a good picture with a cheap camera? Sure. Can a newcomer produce garbage with a great camera? Sure.

If you want to get good images, buy a good camera, good lenses, and learn how to take good pictures. It's a combination of you and your equipment that produces the results.

Absolutely true Jerry. Before one does "learn how to take good pictures" they are a poor photographer and take poor photos
with that "good camera, good lenses".

Even if they use auto everything and everything is focused and exposed to the best of the cameras ability it will still be a crap photo, because a poor photographer will produce a picture that is poorly composed with the light shining in the wrong direction, no idea conveyed with the picture etc.

I'm not denying a good photographer will take stunning photos
with good equipment.

But I know a good photographer can create wonderful, valuable images... great images with the cheapest POS.

However an incompetent photographer will produce incompetent images no matter what equipment s/he uses.

Imho
I't not the camera it's the photographer that counts

Shutter Bugger

Rongnongno wrote:

I do believe that many miss the point. br br Give... (show quote)

You are right... Go spend $100,000
and produce as many artless uninterperative photos as you like.
:thumbup:

dragonfist Loc: Stafford, N.Y.

This has been an interesting read; all nine pages worth. What I am thinking are that there are those that could take a good picture with most any camera and then those that are more interested in owning the fanciest high price equipment even if they will never come close to getting out anywhere near what is built into it. There is no right or wrong to it only differing ideas. Whatever floats a persons boat.

Shutter Bugger

docjoque wrote:

So you're saying a good mechanic can drop a tranny with a Phillips head?

That would be like trying to take a photo with a tripod.

8-)

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Let me repeat.

ARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! Head explodes!

Let me type this very slowly.
A - better - camera - will - take - better - photos.
A - better - photographer - will - take - better - photos.

Shutter Bugger

lighthouse wrote:

Let me repeat.

ARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! Head explodes!

Let me type this very slowly.
A - better - camera - will - take - better - photos.
A - better - photographer - will - take - better - photos.

Yeah.... but a better camera can take worse... worse...
that's not good grammar but I'm using it anyway; worse pictures as well.

Take a Bex and have a cup of tea and a lie down Lighthouse.

Buddha Lighthouse. May peace be with you.