dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

THAT'S RIGHT!!!!! And we have never been stricken with GA...

OHHHH look at the nice shiny lens....

It is sooooo pretty....

I want.....

I am sorry, what was I saying?

Jim Bianco

Great reply Jim

rob s Loc: La Mesa, CA

We obviously have a communication problem here since you guys appear either completely uninterested in or unable to see the higher quality and sophistication of images available with more expensive equipment.
We're not going agree and I'm sorry you are missing what so many of us get great pleasure from.

wfmiller Loc: Morgantown, PA

Nah, that was mostly luck for me!! I admit to being a very GASeous person!! My wife says I have way too much camera gear of both the professional and semi professional variety. P&S are ok and fun to shoot but for serious shots I need the good stuff because I cannot afford to be lucky! I was just saying all the stars were aligned and you could have taken that shot with your phone (had they had them then) and the shot would have been awesome!!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Define "Just as good"?
Composition and actual quality of the thought being conveyed in a photograph any camera that can meet those goals is just fine. If you mean technical good because of glass, camera features then generally speaking the more you pay the better the "Good" photo is. For an overall "good" photo you need the human intelligence and the right equipment for the siuation. Generally the more expensive camera has better capabilities and can cover more siuations so the more you spend, if you have the human talent, the more "good" the photograph.

dirty dave

Yes I have upgraded a few times since 1973. I just got rid of my Canon 1DX to me it was a POS. I shoot with a 50Dit turned in to my favorite camea. I also use a p and s when I don't want to be intrusive. But I like to encourage anyone to take pictures from a inexpensive Casio to a top of the line canon. But if you have money to throw away go ahead and let the camera companies tell you what you need. No matter what you shoot it is what you shoot. I have seen many uses the top equipment and take the most uninteresting pictures. and I have seen some one with a point ans shoot take a stunning photo. I also hate this IPad mini my fat fingers are bigger than the key board. An d of course the arthritis don't help.

Jim Bianco

It's like art .It is in the eye of the beholder.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Those of use who feel we need higher end capabilities in our cameras aren't letting the camera companies tell us what we need, and we aren't throwing our money away. Let's see you shoot indoor sports or performances, or produce exhibition quality large prints with your cheap cameras. Sure, you can make great photos with a cheap camera if you stay within their limitations, but the capabilities of more expensive cameras allows us to shoot more technically challenging subjects.

rob s Loc: La Mesa, CA

This has become a waste of time. You're not going to convince the naysayers who are happy, and rightly so, with their simpler equipment for the photography they do.

Unfortunately they don't wish to make any allowances for other photographers' needs for more challenging situations and higher quality so they have assumed the "I'm smarter than you" stance to promote their greater wisdom and common sense.

Arguing with them begins to look like two fools arguing.

venturer9 Loc: Newton, Il.

Nowhere in the answers here have I read (could have missed it) anyone telling you that they were smarter than you or that they did not want to make allowances for your need or challenges....

I have been a "Photographer" since my first Box Camera in 1954. I have tons of pictures in grocery bags and Shoe Boxes and LOVE to go back and look at the pictures... (In fact have scanned and put on CD's several thousand) They bring back wonderful memories..SOME are definitely HORRIBLE in quality but PRICELESS in memories.... As I have grown older and gotten better, my pictures got better but (I assume) quite a distance from being professional quality...BUT I AM HAPPY WITH THEM.... I love looking at better equipment, but so far in my life I have not decided to pay as much as some of the equipment that has been mentioned on this forum... That is just my decision. My most costly camera was an Olympus C2100UZ at $1200.00 and that was when I was young and foolish (well, younger at least) I love it and still take pictures with it.... It is currently 15yrs old and still works...... 2.1 megapixels.... I also have the Canon Pro is90 which has the same lens as the Olympus above but has 2.6 Magapixels. So it is not in the actual quality of the equipment, it is the Quality that one is wiling to accept in whatever they use.

By the way...I made a comment a while back on this forum about the Canon 50X HS camera, which hit the Hogg like a ton of bricks and for quite a while, it was THE camera to be purchased and used.... Nothing like it so far in the world.... and yet it only cost $399.00 The $4000.00 equipment sort of took a back seat for quite a while...

Mike

taken with Canon Pro is90


taken with Olympus C2100UZ

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Love the photos. Good glass made all the difference.

venturer9 Loc: Newton, Il.

You are right there....

Mike

SteveR Loc: Michigan

That's what I call a great Grandpa!!

PNagy Loc: Missouri City, Texas

The 1DX is a POS, but the 50D is a better camera? That is the first such opinion I have ever seen.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Some people prefer Buick to Ferrari, as well. By the time you adjust the radio on the Ferrari, you've missed the curve.

Isn't the 1DX the reason Scott Kelby switched to Canon?