DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Does the camera matter much?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 69, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/17/2005 07:13:01 PM · #1
Ok I have just been noticing lately that the people with the better digital cameras seem to score better on the challenges. Is this juat the fact that the people with better cameras are better photographers or that a better camera will take better shots?

Message edited by author 2005-02-17 19:13:11.
 02/17/2005 07:15:48 PM · #2
Nah - just makes us with older equipment work that much harder.

Oh, and those of us with older cameras have to work a little harder too!
ROFL
 02/17/2005 07:16:37 PM · #3
I would guess to say its 90% the photographer and 10% the camera.

A good photographer can get a good pic out of a low end camera, a bad photographer will get a so so shot from any camera.

You gotta know how to work it

James

02/17/2005 07:19:09 PM · #4
I agree with James.....and would add that a photographer who has spent time developing their skill is more likely to invest in a better camera...so it's going to be a bit of both.
 02/17/2005 07:22:52 PM · #5
I saw a show recently, on Spike TV I think, about one of the SI Swimsuit shoots. The photographer uses a point & shoot camera because his eyes got too bad to manually focus.
 02/17/2005 07:26:01 PM · #6
Originally posted by sfboatright:
a photographer who has spent time developing their skill is more likely to invest in a better camera.


Exactly what I was to say...
Now all I can say is I agree.
 02/17/2005 07:28:06 PM · #7
90% of the time I think it's down to the photographer. However, there are some shots that you simply can't do on a lesser camera - especially compact cameras, for example. If you're stuck with a camera that has limitations then learning to work within those limitations is as important as having a good idea.

John
 02/17/2005 07:30:48 PM · #8
I agree with the 90% : 10% split in general.

However, under some conditions, such as doing macro work, fast moving objects, unusual lighting conditions, then the camera can make all the difference.

For instance, you try shooting a shot like this with an old point and shoot. You would not have the zoom or the shutter speed (or high ISO option) and the chances of getting this would be next to zero.



With the swimsuit example just mentioned .... more controlled environment, nothing out of the ordinary (presumably), and the you'd get far better results I think from a good photographer with a point/shoot than the best camera in the world with some wally stuck behind it.

However, for the majority of shots it is definitely the photographer.

Message edited by author 2005-02-17 19:31:39.
 02/17/2005 07:33:51 PM · #9
Originally posted by Natator:
you'd get far better results I think from a good photographer with a point/shoot than the best camera in the world with some wally stuck behind it.

I prefer to be called Walter...
 02/17/2005 07:36:19 PM · #10
Ive ribboned with my point and shoot HP compact camera, but today I am the new proud owner of a Canon 20D, ooooh boy do I feel good!!!!!! Wish me luck with my new hardware!!!
 02/17/2005 07:38:20 PM · #11
I think natator's pretty much spot on here. The person behind the camera is obviously the most important thing.

But having said that I just upgraded from a crappy compact p & s, and it has made a big difference. I've submitted 3 challenge photos since the upgrade - 2 of them have been well above 6 and the other one was just under. And the two photos that cleared six would simply not have been possible with my old camera - one is a night shot and the other is far closer in than I could ever get the old camera to focus. Even the other shot would have been tough to get with the old camera as it was a relatively candid moment and I would have had to combat the enormous shutter lag of the compact.

I think the point is, that if you are aware of the limitations of your camera, there are plenty of areas of photography that even a dodgy point and shoot can handle well - I take a lot of architectural photos for example, and the besides a difference in image quality (and a better zoom), most of the time I could take the exact same photo in that genre with the old camera.
 02/17/2005 07:43:43 PM · #12
I'm trying to figure out the pattern but it's not working...LOL

I won a ribbon with my little bitty Sony DSCP32, then I won one with my Kodak DX-6490, and now I've won one with my Rebel. There's no logic there. ROFL!

I think that since I've gotten the Rebel, however, I'm much more inclined to take my time and PLAN things when I am shooting. I work out a lot of things in my head before hand if I'm setting up a shot, and if I'm just taking candids or snaps of animals or birds or that kind of thing, I'm more attentive to the settings and the details. Maybe it's because I don't want to look like a complete moron with an expensive camera. But whatever it is, I'll take it. ;o)
 02/17/2005 07:49:50 PM · #13
For a studio-type setup shot, you can proabaly get away with a decent P&S camera (I can, sort of, with my Canon G6), for landscapes, for the most part, too. Where a good SLR-type camera is crucial is in candid type photography (journalism, sports, wildlife), when you have to take shots fast and you are not given a second chance. And the option to swap lenses is soo tempting! That's why I am upgrading

(waiting for my Nikon D70 to arrive, tick-tock, tick-tock...)
 02/17/2005 07:55:20 PM · #14
I think it is 90% or more photographer. I have a 2k camera in the 20D and my shots still don't look any better than they did with an $800.00 camera. Skill makes alot of difference, and you have to know your camera inside and out.

BYork
//www.BigDPhoto.com
 02/17/2005 08:09:45 PM · #15
Would you rather see pictures taken with a camera like this one taken by a pro or pictures off of a 1Ds II with a 50 F1 set on auto mode taken by an amatuer?

How about 11x14's?

Message edited by author 2005-02-17 20:13:06.
 02/17/2005 08:27:01 PM · #16
I disagree with many who have posted in this thread. If the camera didn't make that big of a diffrence, then i beleive that most of the people on this site would rather keep their money.

I have to say, many of the shots i took on my last trip could not have been taken with a sub $1000 dollar camera. The servo mode made the 150+ shots of humming birds possible, not to mention the lack of shutter lag. Also, images taken with my current cam (20D) simply look better. It seems to capture the color information mych better than my ex-ex-cam (fuji s602z) That fuji was an amazing camera but no comaprison to my current cam. There is ovbiously a large percentage of a image relys on the photographer but rather than 90/10 i would say 50/50 maybe even more in some situations. Ah, here;s a good example, When i'm taking high action shots with my cam, i throgh it into "sports mode" and it automatically adjusts (optomizses) ISO, Exposure, F-Stop for stopping action. All i have to worry about is the composition and getting the right shot at the right moment.

Also, the more expensive cameras usually have better lenses and more controls. So, if you have a high end camera, you can play around with exposure compensation, image exposure monitoring (histograms) and super accurate metering to name a few. If you have a entry level kodak, it's much much more difficult to get a solid decent image because the camera tries to out smart you.

Even the midrange cameras have fixed lenses, so even if you have all the same features, you can't do anything with specilaty lenses. (untra macro, fisheye, mega-zoom) etc...

That's my opinion on the matter.

I say get the best camera you can afford and learn it inside out, so you can shoot on the go. I took me several weeks of reading through the manuals to learn of all the functions of my camera. Any i still carry arond the manual in my bag for reference.

When you put all of this in the context of challenges, things get a little more complicated. Many photographers (myself included) simply don't choose intresting subjects. So we could capture a fantastic image that simply isn't that intresting to viewers. Also, the chalenges have a theme, so if there is a challenge on snow, it's tough for me to compete with the folk in alaska. There are several almost random aspects that play into challenges too. For example, if your image has an attractive woman in it, it'll get a higher score.

bah... who needs spellcheck?

Message edited by author 2005-02-17 20:40:53.
 02/17/2005 08:29:33 PM · #17
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I think that since I've gotten the Rebel, however, I'm much more inclined to take my time and PLAN things when I am shooting. I work out a lot of things in my head before hand if I'm setting up a shot, and if I'm just taking candids or snaps of animals or birds or that kind of thing, I'm more attentive to the settings and the details.


I think Laurie nailed it. If you have a camera that allows you control over all the elements of an exposure, you tend to think about how you want each of those elements to look. If you belive the camera will do whatever it wants, you tend to point and hope. The more you think about what you want it to look like before you press the shutter, the happier you will be with the shot. A great photographer could put a hole in an oatmeal box,slap some film on the back, and take a better picture than I can with my DSLR if he has control over all the elements of the shot.
 02/17/2005 08:34:27 PM · #18
I think that when posting as small as we do here (640 on the largest side), the camera has little to do.

I also think the only reason you noticed that pattern is because people who own DSLR's *tend* (notice I didn't say always) to know more than those who use point and shoots.
 02/17/2005 08:38:54 PM · #19
basically it's like driving a car, a race driver can probably drive your car better and faster than you can, but put you in a race car and you wont get the most from it, probably even end up not much better (but slightly) better than you were in your own car..

like many things in life.
 02/17/2005 08:59:41 PM · #20
Whether a better camera will help you win a ribbon is a bit of an unknown, I don̢۪t think it is fair to say the camera is not a pretty big part of it however.

But if we ask the same question in a broader sense, “does a better camera make for better photos? “ the evidence that I have seen is an overwhelming yes. I have seen this first hand with my wife, the first digital camera that I bought her was a cheap 5 mp Casio point and shoot. It could take a good photo from time to time but there was not much control and the optics were very limited. She was not getting the same kind of photos as when she was shooting a film SLR, so I bought her a 20D. Now she is back to taking very good photos. A camera like the 20D opens up a whole new world of possibilities, shooting with a 300mm lens, shooting in light what would have been far too low for her old camera, an auto focus system that works well and a manual focus for the time you need it.
02/17/2005 09:00:54 PM · #21
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I'm trying to figure out the pattern but it's not working...LOL

I won a ribbon with my little bitty Sony DSCP32, then I won one with my Kodak DX-6490, and now I've won one with my Rebel. There's no logic there. ROFL!


That's the bottom line right there. You are and would be agreat photographer with almost anything that is put in your hands.

Generally speaking people don't throw down money into something they don't love or have some knack for. Ergo...a good photgrapher with passion will usually pop for great equipment.

Outside of that... the 90%-10% thing works.

I need to become a full member and will when I sort out my portfolio.
 02/17/2005 09:02:49 PM · #22
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I'm trying to figure out the pattern but it's not working...LOL

I won a ribbon with my little bitty Sony DSCP32, then I won one with my Kodak DX-6490, and now I've won one with my Rebel. There's no logic there. ROFL!


Actually, I think there's a pretty simple point of commonality which is very logical. You've been working hard at photography, and worked hard through all three cameras. You defined yourself by your work and not your camera. The camera was secondary.

Many people find it easier to say "if only I had XXX camera I could do YYY." Certainly there are times when that's true. But in general, a better camera can only make you more consistent. That can mean consistently good or consistently bad.

I think you'll find that as people progress they discover the things that better cameras can help with, and end up buying them. That's enough explanantion for me. I still maintain that the people who are ribboning would have the same vision regardless of their camera.
 02/17/2005 09:03:53 PM · #23
Most truly great photos are not great because of technical superiority, but rather because they tell a story or take you somewhere, or make you think and reflect.

02/17/2005 09:23:41 PM · #24
Originally posted by photodude:
Most truly great photos are not great because of technical superiority, but rather because they tell a story or take you somewhere, or make you think and reflect.


Not so much here on dpchallenge, do these images make you think?
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_archive.php
 02/17/2005 09:28:35 PM · #25
Originally posted by cghubbell:
Many people find it easier to say "if only I had XXX camera I could do YYY." Certainly there are times when that's true.

This is a very true statement after one gets profficient with what they have and find themselves not being able to expand their creativity.
Case in point is my Oly E-10. Though a very fine camera, being pretty much limited to ISO80 (160 & 320 are too noisy), 1/640 sec and F11.0 do present certain problems.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/10/2025 10:34:06 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/10/2025 10:34:06 AM EDT.