XA: Too unprofessional?

[Q.G.]

As much as i like my XA, it does not produce the best results.
If they are good enough, there is no problem.

But if they are not, i think it would indeed be unprofessional to use it, just because your better equipment isn't avialable.
It would be more professional to pass the job on to someone who can do it as required.

Remember, it's not YOU who must feel comfortable. It is the client who must like that he or she gets his or her money's worth.
If not that, it will be the last time you get a chance pocketing some of their money. And YOU may feel less comfortable because of that.

 

[fotch]

The fact that you asked is telling.

Of course, maybe its a low level assignment not really needing a pro and the pay is not worth putting your best foot forward.

 

[Vonder]

An artist can use whatever camera he damn well pleases. A professional photographer can not.

 

[Jedidiah Smith]

How big are the enlargements going to be? That's the only thing that really matters. If you can get the shots you need with the XA, then forget about the rest. Sure, they might raise their eyebrows in surprise when they see it, but when you hand them the results they will forget all about it - if you deliver quality.
I know you will...you just have to know you will.
Camera envy is really over rated. Get them going on posing, doing their stuff, and fire away. They should be so absorbed in posing for you, so wrapped up in the moment, that they don't even care what you're pointing at them.
Jed

 

[2F/2F]

An artist can use whatever camera he damn well pleases. A professional photographer can not.

Oh.

Good to know.

Well, I guess that settles it.

 

[Rick A]

The fact that you asked is telling.

Of course, maybe its a low level assignment not really needing a pro and the pay is not worth putting your best foot forward.

Every job, no mater if it brings in 10 bucks or ten thousand bucks, is worth "putting your best foot forward" Word of mouth advertising is the best advert you can get. Treat EVERY job as if its worth a million and you will soon build a "reputation" that puts you in high demand. Then you will always have the budget to keep your gear in top notch condition. Then you won't ever have to question whether your equiptment is "professional" enough.

 

[removed account4]

An artist can use whatever camera he damn well pleases. A professional photographer can not.

i have no idea what that means ...

 

[glockman99]

Eventho the Oly XA is capable of producing some excellent photos, that wee little camera wouldn't be my first (or second) choice if I was being paid to shoot a wedding, as it just has too many limitations. In-fact, tomorrow, I do have a wedding to shoot, and I'll be using my Nikon F4s and F3HP cameras.

 

[Markok765]

An artist can use whatever camera he damn well pleases. A professional photographer can not.

Whats the difference?

"As much as i like my XA, it does not produce the best results."
Not to be rude, but maybe you personally prefer other cameras and it shows in your photos? My XA has produced the best results for me, even better than my Leica and Nikon camera, as it totally suits my style and the look I'm wanting to achieve with my photography. I'm considering shooting the Leica instead, even though a wide lens is preferable.

 

[Eric Rose]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfeye
An artist can use whatever camera he damn well pleases. A professional photographer can not.

jnanian
i have no idea what that means ...

I think a better term would be "commercial" photographer rather than "professional". An artist can be a professional photographer but does not (but might in certain circumstances) do commercial work for hire. The "for hire" is the key thing.

 

[Q.G.]

"As much as i like my XA, it does not produce the best results."
Not to be rude, but maybe you personally prefer other cameras and it shows in your photos? My XA has produced the best results for me, even better than my Leica and Nikon camera, as it totally suits my style and the look I'm wanting to achieve with my photography. I'm considering shooting the Leica instead, even though a wide lens is preferable.

The XA lenses vignet and do distort rather a bit.

You may like that beter than what your Leitz or Nikon lenses do, yes.
I do like the XA anyway. Have a couple of them.
But it is not the best of cameras.

 

[Markok765]

Eric, do you think 'commercial' refers to more of a controlled, possibly studio style shot?

Also, I do like the very sharp, slightly distorted, vignetted style of my XA. It's like a holga style in a professional quality lens, if that makes sense. It doesn't look ridiculously 'clean' and perfect, and I like that.

Also, I do not own any Leitz lenses. I have a nice Jupiter 8, which needs a CLA, though it produces unique images.

 

[Q.G.]

Also, I do not own any Leitz lenses. I have a nice Jupiter 8, which needs a CLA, though it produces unique images.

So when you mentioned that your XA produces better results than your Leica, you were actually saying that the Zuiko is better than the Jupiter?!
Now what do you put on your Nikon? A Soligor lens?

 

[Markok765]

So when you mentioned that your XA produces better results than your Leica, you were actually saying that the Zuiko is better than the Jupiter?!
Now what do you put on your Nikon? A Soligor lens?

It's only slightly better! The main thing is I prefer the focal length. It's also a bit sharper wide open.

 

[bbcg59]

Shoot what you are comfortable with! If the Nikon is not ready, and you are comfortable with the results you can obtain with the XA, do it, prove it, show us as well and quiet the naysayers.

 

[Colin Corneau]

The fact you're even asking is pretty much your answer, right there.

But hey, some people like risking their image on a paid commercial shoot. To each their own...

 

[Markok765]

I guess I am risking my image, though my images will tell the story... Its possible, and easy to make pro photos with the XA. I'll post some after the shoot.

 

[Eric Rose]

As long as the client thinks the images are professional that's what matters. They can be as arty as all get out but if it's not what they want your hooped. If you start off with good sharp non funky images you can first show them some funk via PS and if that's not what they want you can go back to something a little more mainstream. If you start off with a negative that is funky looking and vignetted etc you have no backup plan.

As a pro you cannot force your tastes onto the client unless your some big name shooter and they know what you produce and that's why they are hiring you.

 

[abstraxion]

Good lord. I'm so glad that you ended up doing that shoot and proving the naysayers wrong.

I want to link to this thread next time someone makes fun of digital people talking about megapixels. Hey, guys: there are a TON of people out there that will see you shooting film and think you're unprofessional, especially in 35mm. Are they right? Of course not. So how can someone who uses "luddite" material make fun of someone using a compact? Maybe he would have used his Leica, do you think a musician would know or care about the difference? Unlikely.

The XA is a distinctive camera that gives a distinctive look... something I think is advantageous in a world of photographers carrying D700s and Strobist issued light kits.

 

[Steve Smith]

Good lord. I'm so glad that you ended up doing that shoot and proving the naysayers wrong.

I agree.

there are a TON of people out there that will see you shooting film and think you're unprofessional, especially in 35mm. Are they right? Of course not.

A similar question: Could a world class guitarist like Jimmy Page use a budget model Danelectro guitar on a world tour playing to thousands? Well yes, and he did.


Steve.

 

[Q.G.]

A similar question: Could a world class guitarist like Jimmy Page use a budget model Danelectro guitar on a world tour playing to thousands? Well yes, and he did.

Just out of curiosity: he didn't modify anything on that guitar?

 

[fotch]

Good lord. I'm so glad that you ended up doing that shoot and proving the naysayers wrong.

Huh? His first post ask for others opinion, he asked "and I'm wondering if look is important at all?"

How can others opinion be wrong? The answers were of what they would do, given a choice. Are you trying to say that a photographer who shows up with a higher end camera is wrong?

Hey, if the OP is happy, good for him.

 

[abstraxion]

Huh? His first post ask for others opinion, he asked "and I'm wondering if look is important at all?"

How can others opinion be wrong? The answers were of what they would do, given a choice. Are you trying to say that a photographer who shows up with a higher end camera is wrong?

Hey, if the OP is happy, good for him.

I'm sorry? My opinion is the opposite of theirs, and it's one I'm allowed to have. The photos he turned out weren't half bad, and some of the people in this thread were borderline mocking him for taking the chance of using an XA on a paid shoot. Did I even come close to saying that showing up with a higher end camera is "wrong"? No. Please reread my post. What I said was, to a client, the arguments we have over the F5 or the EOS3 or the Yashica Electro 35 GSN are moot... we still use film, and that will evoke a reaction, positive or negative (and most likely negative these days unless they are particularly enlightened).

 

[BetterSense]

Not to hijack, but does anyone with some experience with the XA cameras have any advice on using the fiddly shutter release? Sometimes it just doesn't want to go off no matter how hard I press it. Maybe it's my fat fingers but it's caused me to miss some shots.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Not to hijack, but does anyone with some experience with the XA cameras have any advice on using the fiddly shutter release? Sometimes it just doesn't want to go off no matter how hard I press it. Maybe it's my fat fingers but it's caused me to miss some shots.

Very common problem for that camera... Mine had it too.

1) Repair.

2) Apparently also a fairly easy DIY repair, google around...