Does owning a camera,such as a Hassleblad or Leica, make one a better photographer ?

[Ko.Fe.]

there are photographers who use holga cameras make absolutely beautiful photographs.
i'm thinking of this person, right here on apug:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

but he is able to take make a photograph that would make you cry using a tin can ...

and i am guessing with most people if given the choice between
a tin can, a holga and a hassle hoff people would probably pick the hassel hoff

No needs in guessing. Earlier Vivian Dorothy Maier took beautiful photographs with Brownie. It is documented.
But she switched to Rolleiflex as soon as she was able to afford it on nanny salary.
Why?
All of the pictures I ever looked from Brownie, Diana and Tin Box are beautiful. All of them. Beautiful. But I'm after interesting ones. And with Maeir it happens on the Rolleiflex.

 

[Brian Legge]

The best tool is one that does what you needs and stays out of the way. After trying a lot of gear, I found my M4 to be my best 'gets out of the way' camera. It works for me ergonomically, covers the distance and focal length needs, lets me see outside what the lens captures so I can see what might enter my shot in half a second, is robust enough that I don't fee like I have to baby it, etc.

It isn't my only camera. I'll use an SLR if I'm shooting outside its ideal range (either macro or telephoto shooting). In some situations a TLR is better for getting the shot I want. If I want large prints or expect to do a bunch of cropping, I'll shoot medium format.

Changing shooting styles - which may involve different cameras - can help you grow. For example, a 35mm shooter trying large format for the first time may end up looking at scenes in different ways as the process of shooting is so different. Same thing for a photographer who has only experienced shooting through a viewfinder looking at ground glass for the first time (either TLR or SLR with a WLF).

 

[Adam W]

Does owning an expensive keyboard make you a better writer?

 

[blockend]

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 ?.

It's called "all the gear and no idea". I suspect people take up other hobbies - like camera collecting perhaps?

 

[wiltw]

I don't know about effects on quality of photography, but I am certain that a Hasselblad or Leica owner is poorer after the purchase

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Does owning an expensive keyboard make you a better writer?

Of course not, but having a keyboard that is severely messed up can keep one from writing efficiently or may cause the writer to say, "Effit... I give up".

 

[LarryP]

The only thing that will make you a better writer is Blackwing pencils and they cannot be yellow. As for premium cameras they only help if they allow you to do work in a way that improves your photography.

 

[DREW WILEY]

My Mom used a box Brownie for several decades. She'd look down at the camera, then look up and say smile, then every single time she tripped the
shutter, the camera would end up skewed about twenty degrees, with every single picture she ever took coming out tilted. So yeah, sticking with this
device made her consistent, and it didn't cost all that much to begin with. But there is nothing wrong with a Hasselblad. Put vaseline on the lens and
it can do anything a Holga can!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hassie is square format, so for most purposes, only a 645 negative.

Total BS. I have never shot 120 film in 645 and I never will.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ken Rockwell once made an interesting statement that I find somewhat convincing: There are two kinds of photographers with premium cameras. The one sort just consists of bad and boring photographers that are more interested in gear and pretension. The others are great photographers who, now that they are relieved from any doubts about their equipment because they simply own the best, produce the most fabulous images.

Well then by definition I must be the second type.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Total BS. I have never shot 120 film in 645 and I never will.

Me as well. There were only very few instances when I cropped 6x6.

 

[Doc W]

Let me give and example from another part of my life: music. I have been a musician (mainly guitar) for a little over fifty years. I don't play gigs as much as I used to, but I do teach. If the equipment improved the player, I wouldn't have to teach. I could just tell them to buy a more expensive guitar. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Any good guitar player can make music with any guitar, if that instrument is properly set up. Crappy gear limits your options but not your talent. Two legendary guitarists, Ry Cooder and David Lindley, made a POINT of playing some of the worst guitars ever made and they made great music on them. So go ahead, buy a really upscale Fender guitar for 5K and see if it makes you a better player. Chet Atkins, one of the greatest players ever, was playing a gig one evening and one of his friends said that he loved the sound of Atkins' guitar. Chet pointed to it, as it sat in a guitar stand on the stage, and said, "How does it sound now?" It ain't the guitar, it's the player.

Good equipment, well-maintained, is a joy to use, and it is usually more durable and lasts longer. But If you can't take good photos without high-end gear, you can't take good photos.

 

[removed account4]

Good equipment, well-maintained, is a joy to use, and it is usually more durable and lasts longer. But If you can't take good photos without high-end gear, you can't take good photos

hi doc w:
while i agree with most of what you have said there is something about the last part .
certain types of non-high-end-gear takes learning how to use, it takes patience and understanding
and having an open mind and experimenting a little bit. whether it is a lens that works best in a certain
type of lighting conditions or a camera whose exposure or focus controls need to be understood better.
a lot of people who pick up a camera ( high end or low end ) don't really want to take the time to learn
how to operate it,how to use it .. its, and the users combined limitations. with a shiney new hassle hoff or
rollei or ebony or leica or ( fillin the blank ) to a certain extant, the limitations are only the photographer's, not the equipment.
not to say beautiful cameras don't have limitations ( it is hard to do "street" work with a view camera, and it is hard to to PC work wtih a 35mm )
that said, if you ever saw the film called "lumiere and company" you would have seen something like 100
best movie makers from across the planet. they were given the opportunity to shoot a IDK 90 second film using
the lumiere brothers' original movie camera ( maybe it was the one used to film the train IDK ) the same way the lumiere brothers did.
while all the movie makers made their films not many of them did more than run 90 seconds of film through
the camera and enjoy actually using the first movie camera.
to me at least there is a distinction between using the camera and USING the camera.
while spike lee's film of a baby eating food in a high chair was kind of fun, david lynch's film went beyond fun, he was able
to USE the camera, not just use it.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

There are limits. Try to take a decent image through a broken Coke bottle.

Sometimes $#!+ in = $#!+ out. Other times a fresh rose filtered through $#!+ loses all it's wonderful fresh fragrance.

 

[removed account4]

but ONF
i think there is a different between a coke bottle and something just not as high end as a leica or hasselblad

 

[Soeren]

There are plenty of cameras out there able to deliver result way above the quality treshold only costing a fraction of a Leica or Hasselblad. Buying the latter two won't make you a great/better photographer but they might help you up your game if you already are.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

but ONF
i think there is a different between a coke bottle and something just not as high end as a leica or hasselblad

Agreed... the point is ones must draw the line 'somewhere'.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Yeah, they should draw the line somewhere. I jes don't know about allowing "concealed carry" cameras.

 

[benjiboy]

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.

Juan Fangio before he was a racing driver was a Rome bus driver, so you are most probably right Scott.

 

[Diapositivo]

Juan Fangio before he was a racing driver was a Rome bus driver, so you are most probably right Scott.

Although this is credible (after having been a taxi driver in Rome, nothing is precluded to you ), I don't think it is accurate.
According to the Italian edition of Wikipedia Fangio ran his first race on a Ford A which "they say" was previously a taxi.

 

[Wallendo]

I heard this piece today on my way to work:
http://www.npr.org/2016/05/11/477607394/does-the-placebo-effect-influence-consumer-products

Although they don't talk about photography, it seemed relevant to the topic. Basically, novices perform better when they believe they are using better equipment.

I suspect a similar effect occurs with photography. I.e., a novice given a Leica will take better photographs than a novice given a FED. An experienced photographer probably would not see a big difference (or at least not much difference if he had a well-calibrated FED).

 

[Slixtiesix]

Interesting theory!

 

[chuck94022]

I hate to do this, but I'm going to reveal a deep dark secret of great photographers.

It has nothing to do with the quality of the equipment. Rather, it has everything to do with the quality of your assistants.

If you don't have a careful assistant responsible for cleaning your lenses, you could have smudges or dust. ON THE LENS! Hire a great lens cleaning assistant!

If you don't have a great lighting assistant, you could have weird light spilling all over the place. OVER EXPOSURE! WEIRD SHADOWS! Hire a great lighting assistant!

If you don't have a great equipment manager, you could show up at a shoot, stick out your hand, and be given a sandwich instead of a camera! YOU MISS THE DECISIVE MOMENT! Hire a great equipment manager!

If you don't have a great driver, you could end up late or in the wrong location for your brilliant shot. MISSED THE LIGHT! Hire a great driver!

If you don't have a great chef, you'll have the shakes from hunger when you try to take that shot. BLUR! Hire a great chef!

If you don't have a great location assistant, how can you find the great scenery? BORING LANDSCAPES! Hire a great location assistant!

If you don't have a good technical assistant, how can you assure proper exposures? UNDEREXPOSED SHADOWS! BLOWN HIGHLIGHTS! Hire a great technical assistant.

If you don't have a good portage team, how can you get your stuff to the location? MISSING GEAR! Hire great porters!

There you go. It has so little to do with the equipment, and everything to do with your own inherent talent. You alone make great photographs! Make sure you sign your name to your prints after your personal finishing assistant completes the development, printing and mounting!

-chuck

 

[captain ZZM]

I using FED2- just like Leica, and Lubitel 166- just like Rollei. I admit the Leica lens and camera is better than Russian, but l can still taking a good .

 

[jonasfj]

Of course your choice of tool influence the way you take pictures. A carpenter probably has an expensive hammer or even an automatic hammer.

I have a plastic Minolta that I bought with two zoom lenses for about 15 dollars. It works really well in good light if the subject does not move. However, zooming to the longer focal lengths, the max aperture is f/5.6, which limits low light photography. It also takes quite a while for it to focus and the time to shutter release seems completely unpredictable. Good luck shooting sports.

On the other hand, there are very good cameras that you can get for quite little money.

I could stick my neck out and argue that a Nikon FE that you can get with a 50/1.8 for 50 dollars might be better in many cases than a Leica for 1500 dollars. Yes, because it is a tool where you see what you photograph and there are almost no trade-offs in image quality.

Cheers,

Jonas