Do You Really Believe Its The Photographer And Not The Equipment (Page 5): Photography is an art. Put a 4,000.00 guitar in a beginners hands and a 400.00 guitar in Eric Clapton’s hands...

machia Loc: NJ

Photography is an art.
Put a 4,000.00 guitar in a beginners hands and a 400.00 guitar in Eric Clapton’s hands and who do you think is going to sound better ?
It’s the same with a camera.
Give a beginner a medium format Leica with a 10,000.00 lens and you’ll get a snapshot. Give a point and shoot or an iPhone to a pro like Eric Meola and you’ll see art.
My take on it anyway.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

joer wrote:

Mostly what one hears from photographers, i.e., pro, enthusiast and neophytes, is that the equipment doesn't matter; its the photographer.

Then one has to ask, how many cameras, lenses, flashes, accessories, etc., do you have? Or what cameras or equipment do you lust after?

I think the evidence suggests that gear does matter, although it may not be most important. A skilled lumberjack with an axe will not compete with a man/woman who knows how to use a chain saw.

Yes, it is definitely the photographer that matters, every single click of the shutter.
And your analogy is wrong in comparing an axe to a chain saw and making it sound like it's the same with camera's. It is not the same. Bad analogy.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

joer wrote:

Mostly what one hears from photographers, i.e., pro, enthusiast and neophytes, is that the equipment doesn't matter; its the photographer.

Then one has to ask, how many cameras, lenses, flashes, accessories, etc., do you have? Or what cameras or equipment do you lust after?

I think the evidence suggests that gear does matter, although it may not be most important. A skilled lumberjack with an axe will not compete with a man/woman who knows how to use a chain saw.

It is very hard to dispute the logic of this argument. Today’s advanced digital technology makes creating fantastic images so much better than the primitive equipment used in prior decades. It’s just too bad that “photographers” such as Henri Cartier-Bresson and Ansel Adams did not have access to the great stuff we have today. If they had, they may have become famous.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

It’s an interesting thought, perhaps prompted by the emphasis on equipment talk here on the forum. Don’t get me wrong. There are many excellent photos shown here by some very creative artists but it seems that there is a constant dialogue about the hardware and not the artistic merit. It may be because it’s easier to discuss a 1.8 versus a 1.4 lens rather than delve into the creativity revealed in any given photo.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

An artist can capture beauty with any camera. The rest of us need the best camera.

Silverrails

joer wrote:

Mostly what one hears from photographers, i.e., pro, enthusiast and neophytes, is that the equipment doesn't matter; its the photographer.

Then one has to ask, how many cameras, lenses, flashes, accessories, etc., do you have? Or what cameras or equipment do you lust after?

I think the evidence suggests that gear does matter, although it may not be most important. A skilled lumberjack with an axe will not compete with a man/woman who knows how to use a chain saw.

They will if the Chainsaw runs out of Gas😂

Dossile

Will a skilled photographer get a remarkable shot even with mediocre equipment, where a novice will get nothing? Yes. But to capture a specific vision, you need the right equipment. I looked over at the National Geographic truck in Kenya. We were all staring at a few well hidden cheetahs. 3 people manned the truck. A round lens, like a 15 inch globe, sat on a gimbal over the bumper. A couple of laptops were plugged into a large console behind the front seats in the bed of the land rover. Two guys were sprawled with legs dangling out the doors in front with a petite gal playing solitaire in the bed of the land rover. The best Canon handheld video camera is not going to capture equivalent images to the National Geographic truck, even with the best photographer on earth. But 3 novices in the National Geo truck aren’t going to capture anything worthwhile.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

CHG_CANON wrote:

An artist can capture beauty with any camera. The rest of us need the best camera.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

CHG_CANON wrote:

Your attitude will go a long way toward determining your success. Or, you can buy a new camera.

Honesty and truthfulness should be the determining factors. Then maybe you will not need anything new. At least you would be honest.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

CHG_CANON wrote:

An artist can capture beauty with any camera. The rest of us need the best camera.

👍👍👍👍

joncogar Loc: WV

A camera has no knowledge or skills. It just plastic and metallic parts. It cannot do anything until you pick it up. Still it cannot do anything until you use your knowledge to take a photo. Your knowledge will depend how your photo results.
Within the photographer the camera is just a paperweight.

wetreed

Of course the equipment matters. Equipment is a huge, Major factor. The better equipment you have the better photographer you have the capability of becoming. Great equipment is also a lot of fun to use. Obviously one has to know how to use really great equipment, but I get really sick of all these old fogies always sayings “ you don’t need this just keep what you have and be satisfied with that”. Very often new is better. Bottom line, new equipment is Fun and photography should be fun.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The math of a beautiful image is easy: it has twice the megapixels of your current sensor.

Matt_F Loc: Wausau, Wisconsin

machia wrote:

Photography is an art.
Put a 4,000.00 guitar in a beginners hands and a 400.00 guitar in Eric Clapton’s hands and who do you think is going to sound better ?
It’s the same with a camera.
Give a beginner a medium format Leica with a 10,000.00 lens and you’ll get a snapshot. Give a point and shoot or an iPhone to a pro like Eric Meola and you’ll see art.
My take on it anyway.

I was going to basically post the same thing but you did it for me. So what you said. A pro will constantly take better photo's with a cheap camera vs an amateur with a high end camera.

b top gun

I made the jump from a Nikon 24mp D7100 to a Nikon 45mp D850 shortly after the D850 became available. The more I used and learned about the D850, the more I went back to the D7100 to see what I had missed about it. I use both and enjoy using both. I have 4 Nikkor manual focus primes from film days and 2 Nikon FX lenses (24-70 and 70-200). I use all 6 lenses on both bodies.

I have done 5 trips out to AZ, OR and WA. If I get one really great wall hanger a day I am happy. My focus now is to take fewer shots but get more "keepers" as Steve Perry calls them. I am my own harshest critic. I go back and revisit pics from previous shoots and see what I could improve upon.