Does the quality of camera realy matter?

10/06/2003 02:28:57 PM · #1

I took these picture long time ago.I like it alot.I think that is my best picture so far.I have realy bad camera, and don't beleave that someone in DPC uses camera as bad as I am.I think this picture shows that it doesn't matter if I have very expensive camera to capture some good photos.
Can you give me your judgement of my picture.I put original, and one with some edit.
Do you like it, and which one do you like better?
Thanx!

10/06/2003 03:03:22 PM · #2

Hey at least your cam has 2MP! Anything less is junk. Those pix are good. I do like the second one best... has more warmth to it.
Since I've been borrowing many cameras I've TOTALLY noticed a HUGE quality difference in a cam of 1MP and a cam with 2+MP. If I were you I'd just get better at pleasing the audience than worrying about getting a better cam. 2MP is all a beginner really needs. Plus that'll give you time to find out all you can about what cam(s) you may want to buy when you step your way up the ladder.
Aloha!

kavamama

Panasonic DMC-FZ10

10/06/2003 03:21:17 PM · #3

I DEFINITELY like the edited version better. More contrasty, better saturation of colors, much more lively and interesting. Nice shot, what IS that??

10/06/2003 03:22:31 PM · #4

Thanx for your advice Kali.You are right.I am just a beginner but only thing that bothers me is that I don't have many manual options on my camera like shutter speed, what would realy help me to improve my pic quality and improve myself.

10/06/2003 03:24:18 PM · #5

I know what it is but I don't know how to say it in english...

10/06/2003 03:42:23 PM · #6

Originally posted by tkalect:

No problem:) I was having the same gripes when I came here. Only thing is that my cam (HP C200) really is junk. I honestly do feel I've surpassed it's abilities, but I'm having loads of fun with my mom's cam (D510) at the moment. I know it's hard knowing what you want but lacking the gear. Just try and not think of what you don't have but enjoy what you have and work with your camera. Then you can surprise even yourself.
Wish you knew what that thing was in english. Sure is interesting.

10/06/2003 03:48:20 PM · #7

I'll find out the word and let you know.I appreciate your advice.

10/06/2003 03:53:21 PM · #8

Cool, thanks.
It looks like some kind of fuzzy caterpillar.

Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

10/07/2003 03:27:23 AM · #9

Yes, it's a caterpillar or a grub.

hgpayne

Canon EOS-5D

10/07/2003 10:48:12 AM · #10

Originally posted by Kali:

Hey at least your cam has 2MP! Anything less is junk.

I disagree. I didn't want to chance losing my 'good' camera on my first few business trips to the UK, so I brought my old Olympus D-400z, a 1.3MP camera. That 'crappy' camera took many fine pictures, in my opinion. Maybe the following wouldn't exactly qualify for the 'Urban' challenge, but I like it a lot and it even printed fairly nice as an 8x10.

This is the Great Hall in Winchester. Straight ahead is King Arther's round table. The guy in the lower right was there reading some sign, but provides and excellent reference for scale.

Message edited by author 2003-10-07 10:49:45.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

10/07/2003 11:02:17 AM · #11

i suppose it depends on what you want to do with the camera.
i started taking photos with an canon SLR a long time ago.

when i got a digital on a whim before a trip, got this kodak
the digital stuff took some learning - and i enjoyed the kodak for a while. now that i have a good grasp of the digital darkroom aspect, i am missing all the features my old camera allowed me. the more i use my current camera - the more i see its limitations - although i keep snapping away with it - sometimes i cant capture what i see the same as i could on film...

EDIT: or with a higher end digital camera

soup

Message edited by author 2003-10-07 11:03:06.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

10/07/2003 11:15:38 AM · #12

Here, hopefully to inspire people -- it's not the camera it's what you shoot. so take heart!

Blue Ribbon Winner - 1.2 mpx camera

Red Ribbon Winner - 1,3 mpx

Yellow Ribbon Winner -- 1.3 mpx

Message edited by author 2003-10-07 11:17:15.

RHoldenSr

Canon EOS-5D

10/07/2003 12:19:58 PM · #13

I always felt it was not the camera but the photographer behind the camera.

But when I got my first "digital" the Olympus C-3030Z and it was non SLR I had a very difficult time changing over.

See I have owned nothing but Canon SLR cameras since I got into photography back in the early 70's. And to be able to look through the lens and have the ability to very closely compose my shot was great.

With the Olympus it was very hard for me. The view finder was to the upper left of the lens, the LCD panel was no good at all outdoors. I had a heck of a time working with it. And when our two sons' graduated the lens and camera zoom were not good enough to handle the job. I wish I had brought my EOS 650 (film). So then when the prices starting dropping on the Canon SLR's I just had to make that cross over again.

No it is not the camera. I think it is all what you are trained on and what mindset you develop. It is having an open mind and being able to work with what you have and know it's limits.

Calvus

kavamama

Panasonic DMC-FZ10

10/07/2003 02:45:50 PM · #14

I just have one question, then. WHY do so many good to excellent photographers on their "middle range" cameras feel so compelled to get better cameras? Team 10D?? Rebel???

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

10/07/2003 02:47:52 PM · #15

My best scores are still with my DSC-S50, a 2.1 megapixel camera. It also came in a 1.3 megapixel S30 version, which was prestty much identical aside from the lesser resolution. As I often shot at the medium resolution, I was essentially using a 1.3 megapixel camera. If you're into handholding landscape shots for the web, smaller-sensor cameras are, in my opinion , superior in convenience to DSLRs in this regard. I could handhold shots with huge depth of field at apertures I could never handhold with the 10D. However, I am also interested in sports and portraits - an area which point-and-shoots are not nearly so good.

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

10/07/2003 02:55:03 PM · #16

If Fuji 3800 had :
ISO 400
12X zoom
S priority
Red focusing light
I wouldn't need better camera !

10/07/2003 02:58:52 PM · #17

i can only share my personal reasons -- they may not apply to anyone else.

a) the hope/hype that maybe it actually *is* THAT MUCH BETTER.

b) the fun factor - more options to play with. important for enthusiasts.

c) the promise of bigger more detailed prints.

d) the 'professionalism' effect - if u have dreams of making money with it, it's harder to be taken seriously with a little tiny digicam.

e) responsiveness. nothing to do with image quality but the most sluggish dslr is way more responsive than the best non-dslr.

f) flexibility. the ability to take more TYPES of shots well - assuming you have the bucks for the appropriate lenses. however many of the high end non-dslr's have this covered with excellent zoom ranges, macro, and low light ability.

g) shallow dof shallow dof shallow dof

h) the hope/hype that maybe it actually *is* THAT MUCH BETTER :-D

Originally posted by kavamama:

I just have one question, then. WHY do so many good to excellent photographers on their "middle range" cameras feel so compelled to get better cameras? Team 10D?? Rebel???

Message edited by author 2003-10-07 15:00:20.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

10/07/2003 03:10:10 PM · #18

Originally posted by kavamama:

I just have one question, then. WHY do so many good to excellent photographers on their "middle range" cameras feel so compelled to get better cameras? Team 10D?? Rebel???

Any camera within its zone of use will make great pictures. This 'zone' just gets bigger with more complex cameras.

E.g., more pixels, so you can print larger or with more detail. Not an issue for the web, but a 1 Mp won't get you very far with prints.

Faster shooting, for sports or action photography - again a larger 'zone' of applicability.

Rougher conditions require a more robust camera system - hence the weather seal and expensive construction of high end cameras.

Better optics - again for areas with more stringent quality requirements, such as large prints.

Any camera can create wonderful images in the right hands, under the correct conditions - more expensive cameras have features that widen the conditions that the cameras work will within.

10/07/2003 03:19:03 PM · #19

Originally posted by Calvus:

I always felt it was not the camera but the photographer behind the camera.

Yes of course the camera can't shoot it's own pix! If it really doesn't matter then why don't we trade for a month. Didn't think so.
I wouldn't go record a band on a crappy little all in one recorder why should photography be any different?
Gonna hafta put this in my sig one day... GEAR MATTERS!

mag - So what a few ribbon winners with 1+MP out of how many ribbon winners? There's bound to be a few but that's all, just a few.

timj351

Sony DSC-F707

10/07/2003 03:28:45 PM · #20

No camera will help you with your artistic vision but often it requires an advanced camera to fully capture that vision. When it comes to things such as precision focussing, shallow DOF, low noise, low distortion, high resolution, the ease of using filters and fast processing times, it is necessary to have a fairly advanced camera. None of thes factors insures a great photo and none of them are required for a great photo but these are some of the options that most serious photographers need so they are ready for most photographic situations.

T

Message edited by author 2003-10-07 15:29:01.

10/07/2003 03:31:15 PM · #21

i think that has a lot more to do with the fact that people that are into it go onto more expensive cameras. remember that at one time, not that long ago, the high end cameras were all 1.+ mpx.

Originally posted by Kali:

mag - So what a few ribbon winners with 1+MP out of how many ribbon winners? There's bound to be a few but that's all, just a few.

Message edited by author 2003-10-07 15:32:44.

10/07/2003 03:35:22 PM · #22

I think, that people can make good pics, but it's very difficult.It would be much easyer that we have better cameras. Only thing I can say is that we can just hope that we will have enough money one day to buy one. I'm only 16 now, and I can't wait to find a job, and buy new camera!

10/07/2003 03:35:50 PM · #23

See well you even said it yourself... gear matters.

Originally posted by magnetic9999: