OMG, you mean I might kill myself by using a Deardorff?? TG I can't afford one.
The original question was "Does owning a (insert brand here) camera make you a better photographer?". While having certain tools will increase if not eliminate limits on what you can do when you have the talent, if you don't have the talent, the tool you own doesn't matter. While you are correct that you aren't going to win a Formula 1 race with a Beetle, no matter how good a driver you are, learning to drive in a Formula 1 racecar, especially without proper supervision and guidance, exponentially increases the odds that you're going to kill yourself and/or innocent bystanders until you get your tool under control. AND, keeping with the car metaphor, put a Beetle in the hands of Juan Manuel Fangio and he probably can beat you or me through city traffic with us driving a Ferrari.
A Blad or a Leica does more for one's ego than it contributes to their photography. You can take perfectly dreadful photos with either one. The reason why professionals use these cameras is for dependability.
You realize these statements kind of contradict each other, right?
. . .
These camera brands did not get where they are today because of egos, they are where they are due to the incredible imagery made with them for many decades.
No, I don't find my post contradictory. There are other brands that are just as capable as the Blads and Leicas but do not have the same cachet. Having spoken with a National Geographic staff photographer about equipment, his main concern was dependability. You can have good optics etc but this does no good if the camera fails somewhere in the Artic.
It may be a Freudian slip but notice the wording of the title. "Does owning a camera, such as a Hassleblad or Leica, make one a better photographer ?" Notice the poster says "owning" not "using." Hence my comment about ego.
While you are correct that you aren't going to win a Formula 1 race with a Beetle, no matter how good a driver you are ....
Ok, I can tell is a "you win" thing, so you win..
But....I personally know about 20 NG shooters and it is not about cachet.
it might end up being a case of the tortoise and the hare.
the person in the vw beetle, even though the top speed going down a hill
might be 88mph, he is out of the way of the rest of the drivers who are busy
trying to outmaneuver each other, crashing, showing off for the fans, doing donuts on the grass &c
and the person driving the beetle just goes around and finishes the race.
the same could be said about someone with expensive gear.Ha ha... that's an interesting play on the other analogies. I actually 'partially' agree.
the same could be said about someone with expensive gear.
they might be too nervous when they use it
( if i break this it is $X.xx ! down the drain so i better be careful )
so it might take them 10x as long to make the exposure as someone
with pedestrian equipment .. not to mention
the person who is carfully using the expensive equipment might be chatted to by
people interested in shiney things &c while the person with pedistrian equipment might just
take the photograph without a crowd watching the performance art piece.
hesitation / nervousness because one is using something expensive might not lead to great photography, but at least the person made some new friends.
That's the thing--I really got noticed w/my M3 while walking around here in Youngstown, which has very few people about, and at a busy auto swap meet. Buy no one ever noticed my chrome Nikon FTN.the same could be said about someone with expensive gear.
they might be too nervous when they use it
( if i break this it is $X.xx ! down the drain so i better be careful )
so it might take them 10x as long to make the exposure as someone
with pedestrian equipment .. not to mention
the person who is carfully using the expensive equipment might be chatted to by
people interested in shiney things &c while the person with pedistrian equipment might just
take the photograph without a crowd watching the performance art piece.
hesitation / nervousness because one is using something expensive might not lead to great photography, but at least the person made some new friends.
I just want people's opinions on this topic. I had always wondered if owning,what I would describe as a premium quality camera,would help me be a better photographer or are cameras like these considered a status symbol.?
Thanks,
Doug
I just want people's opinions on this topic. I had always wondered if owning,what I would describe as a premium quality camera,would help me be a better photographer or are cameras like these considered a status symbol.?
Thanks,
Doug
Obviously yes. An expensive camera will make you feel is wasted money if you don't use it. So an expensive camera will push you in practicing more photography. And practice, practice, practice and experience are the way to becoming a good photographer
Dah, I wrote this without reading the thread and see that Flavio wrote something similar just before my text.
Wait. It doesn't? Cripes. I've wasted $75k. Well, at least my lousy playing sounds good in my livingroom.... If I own a Steinway, does it qualify me to solo at Carnegie Hall?
i can see how someone can say that
but i personally know 1 person, and
was an acquaintence of another person
who got expensive cameras and they did
not improve. one person sent me a post card
telling me how awful she was and apologized
the other was a classmate. he photographed
crushed beer cans found on the street
( a la irving penn's cigarette butts i guess )
and i am sorry to say this but even after they got their
"upgrades" they never improved.. maybe there are people
who DO impove when they get new expensive gear, but neither of these people did,
so whenever i read threads like this where people say
" oh yeah all the time, some gets better with expensive gear"
( HUGE large format camera with expensive lenses or uber expensive MF gear )
i aleays think of these 2 people. they may not be typical
but just the same, neither got better ...
and in one case it was more BLING than anything else ..
when i say BLING i mean like an italian horn around his neck
... hey look at me, i have an expensvie camera and i am a photographer &c ...
That's a good reason not to use the Leica. When I carry one my wife asks why all these old men start bothering me when I'm not that kind of guy and it's not that part of town.That's the thing--I really got noticed w/my M3 while walking around here in Youngstown, which has very few people about, and at a busy auto swap meet. Buy no one ever noticed my chrome Nikon FTN.
i can see how someone can say that
but i personally know 1 person, and
was an acquaintence of another person
who got expensive cameras and they did
not improve. one person sent me a post card
telling me how awful she was and apologized
the other was a classmate. he photographed
crushed beer cans found on the street
( a la irving penn's cigarette butts i guess )
and i am sorry to say this but even after they got their
"upgrades" they never improved.. maybe there are people
who DO impove when they get new expensive gear, but neither of these people did,
so whenever i read threads like this where people say
" oh yeah all the time, some gets better with expensive gear"
( HUGE large format camera with expensive lenses or uber expensive MF gear )
i aleays think of these 2 people. they may not be typical
but just the same, neither got better ...
and in one case it was more BLING than anything else ..
when i say BLING i mean like an italian horn around his neck
... hey look at me, i have an expensvie camera and i am a photographer &c ...
This all brings me back to my perennial question, what do you do when you have the best and most expensive equipment that money can buy and your pictures are still crap ?.
That's going "from the sublime to the ridiculous" Flavio, however I believe a good photographer however lousy the definition of the Holga lenses can take meaningful images depending on what subject he points it at.You get yourself the cheapest camera (like a Holga) and try to make good pictures with that.
You get yourself the cheapest camera (like a Holga) and try to make good pictures with that.
That's going "from the sublime to the ridiculous" Flavio, however I believe a good photographer however lousy the definition of the Holga lenses can take meaningful images depending on what subject he points it at.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?