Does the camera matter? (Page 5): A friend of mine is an award winning photographer. He won contests with point and shoot cameras, but when he switched to Canon SLR and L lenses his...

PNagy Loc: Missouri City, Texas

A friend of mine is an award winning photographer. He won contests with point and shoot cameras, but when he switched to Canon SLR and L lenses his work became better. The machine and the operator both count.

anotherview Loc: California

Minor White said it takes 10 years to learn photography. After all, as a skill, doing photography requires practice to improve. Practice involves a trial-and-error process, and learning from it.

Nowadays, one may use a point-and-shoot camera to learn the basic concepts of photography, given the growing sophistication, within limits, of these devices. Of course, functional differences separate the P&S from the DSLR. An individual wishing to gain more control over his photography-related efforts will eventually understand the advantage of using a DSLR (or one of the mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras), if for nothing else the superior optics available for these cameras.

My trek in photography began with a P&S camera, but I outgrew it, and bought a Canon Rebel. Yet, I still own P&S cameras. Ha, ha. A few of my worthy photographs have come from these little cameras. The two photographs below I took at Bryce Canyon NP a couple years ago using a Canon SD1200.

ShakyShutter wrote:

You've read it a hundred times in the past few wee... (show quote)

Agua Canyon Sign, BCNP

Eroded Hoodoos, BCNP

willgil Loc: Newton, Mass.

Yes, I agree that it is the one behind the lens that determines whether or not you get a good photograph. I would strongly disagree that you can blow up a shot from a 2 megapixel camera to a poster sized print. I have a 6 megapixel Nikon Coolpix which takes great photographs, but if you try to go larger than 8 X 10, it starts to pixellate. I still use this camera once in a while, but I mainly use my Nikon D3000 for most work, and I have been shooting for decades.

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

When my daughter started cello lessions her teacher took her cello and played and it sounded wonderful. I asked how she got that great sound with a cheap ($2000} she said she had to work a lot harder then with her cello and their were some sounds that she could not get with the student model. I think its the same with cameras. If the suject is in the range of the camera if you work hard you can get great pictures if not you need a better camera/lens. - Dave

sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

since the camera doesn't matter anybody with a d-300, d-700 or d-3 that wants to feel liberated, i have a nikon l-22 point +shoot i'll trade straight up. Anybody? Anybody?

I shoot with a p+s because thats all i can afford, and it does offer the put in pocket take it with you at all times advantage. and it does take incrediable photos but to paraphrase Dire Straights " I want my, I want my, I want my dslr".

SpiffyPhoto Loc: Southern Wisconsin

ShakyShutter wrote:

You've read it a hundred times in the past few wee... (show quote)

Hi ShakyShutter ..... I believe it takes all three ..... camera, lens, and the photographer ...... however. the photographer's responsibility is to know his/her camera and the capabilities of the camera also the framing or composition of the photo (read the inst book) ..... the camera can be a point & shoot camera to the most expensive (remember you pay for what you get) .... same with a lens ...... its a never ending learning process ..... mho .... oh yea I forgot some of the phone camera's are very good as well .. happy shooting ... :thumbup:

steve40 Loc: Asheville/Canton, NC, USA

You can be a good photographer with any camera, or you can be a bad photographer with the best camera. The bottom line is to strive to become a good photographer, with the tools you have at present. Then you can invest in tools that will make your job easier, and produce better quality results.

But dont make the mistake of thinking buying a camera you probably wont understand, and then operating it in the green box mode, is going to do anything for your photography. :(

SpiffyPhoto Loc: Southern Wisconsin

bobmielke wrote:

Lazy? Do folks go out to their car, attach the crank handle & fire up the engine? Do we light a fire to boil water for a bath? I'm sure you hang your hand washed clothing on a line outside to dry also. Do we text instead of actually speaking to people? I don't think I'd apply the word lazy to anyone using a modern digital camera.

Hi Bob ..... I must agree we all have become lazy ..... I would complain if I had to get up and change the t.v. channel .... I will say that I learned more with a manual film camera than any modern day camera .....

ndlaw

The ability to select just the right lens (and in my opinion a quality lens is much more important than the camera body) seperates the DSLR from the PS. You are simply NOT going to get an image with beautiful soft bokeh with a PS verses a DSLR with a 50mm f/1.2 lens attached.

Granted, for some types of photography (landscapes, for example) a top end PS in the hands of a good photographer will give you an image that is just as visually appealing as that taken with a DSLR. But where DOF is important (and it usually is for a good photographer), the weapon of choice is going to be a DSLR fitted with an appropriate lens for the occassion.

MWAC Loc: Somewhere East Of Crazy

sinatraman wrote:

since the camera doesn't matter anybody with a d-300, d-700 or d-3 that wants to feel liberated, i have a nikon l-22 point +shoot i'll trade straight up. Anybody? Anybody?

I shoot with a p+s because thats all i can afford, and it does offer the put in pocket take it with you at all times advantage. and it does take incrediable photos but to paraphrase Dire Straights " I want my, I want my, I want my dslr".

I'll gladdly take anyone's 5D MK II and any L series lenses they would like to part with as well.

;)

jepoplin Loc: Steamboat Springs, CO

It's true a good photographer can take a great photo with any camera... it is skill. It just depends on the outcome you desire and if your camera is capable of it. I started out in the 'digital realm' of photography with a P&S, and eventually realized I had outgrown it... so I upgraded (a few times).

John
http://www.johnepoplin.com/

BrandyVSOP Loc: Oregon USA

ShakyShutter wrote:

You've read it a hundred times in the past few wee... (show quote)

Absolutely! A good or great camera will just allow a good or great photographer to create a better image.
But the best camera... is the one you have with you~

bobmielke Loc: Portland, OR

sinatraman wrote:

since the camera doesn't matter anybody with a d-300, d-700 or d-3 that wants to feel liberated, i have a nikon l-22 point +shoot i'll trade straight up. Anybody? Anybody?

I shoot with a p+s because thats all i can afford, and it does offer the put in pocket take it with you at all times advantage. and it does take incrediable photos but to paraphrase Dire Straights " I want my, I want my, I want my dslr".

I moved from the Nikon L1 to the L22 and loved both of them. My best friend dropped his pocket digital in a river so I gave him my L22 and bought my first DSLR, a Nikon D40X.

bobmielke Loc: Portland, OR

SpiffyPhoto wrote:

quote=bobmielke Lazy? Do folks go out to their ca... (show quote)

I got into film photography while stationed in Misawa, Japan in the USAF in 1970. They handed me a free 10,000 foot roll of B-52 B&W mapping fils, ASA 2, and all the Kodak Dektol developer to process it. I loaded film in my barracks wall locker by hand using reloadable 35mm cassettes. Ah, the fun days. :)

sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

I love that L-22. it is quite a camera, still can't touch nikot lens quality. I just hate having to look through menus to change iso or shutterspeeds. But fed ex just delivered from KEH a mint condition nikon n-55 film slr i paid a whopping $14.00 for to replace a n-75 with a broken battery door that would have cost me at least $35 to fix. I still have a few rolls of what's that stuff called we used to capture photos with? oh yes film. have to take er out, i just DESPISE paying 10.99 for crappy development from cvs/wallgreens. now to find an inexpensive shoe mount for nikon flash, to replace my broken sigma flash. why does everything have to be made out of cheap, brittle plastic these days?