If you want to learn more about taking photographs from still life through to portraiture at a much more in depth level than youtube allows, head here tinhouse-studio.com/studio-access/
I agree with Scott-camera choice doesn’t matter that much. My priority was the lens, not the camera body, which is why I chose the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8. As an event photographer in Brussels, Belgium, specializing in political and cultural events, I need gear that’s practical and versatile. Since I’m not a fan of the Nikon mirrorless lineup, I opted for Sony (this lens is compatible with both systems). The Tamron 35-150mm is ideal for my work, sparing me the hassle of carrying the typical 24-70mm and 70-200mm kit. Ultimately, it’s not the camera that matters-practicality is everything. Tin House Studio is one of the best photography infotainment channels. I love the relaxed, casual vibe of this couch setup-much better than a formal studio feel.
"If William Eggleston can do it wit a Leica and roll of Kodakchrome, and I can't even get close with a 100 MP technical camera, what does that tell you of the importance of photography".... I think that is the most accurate truth of photography, period. Excellent video, very down to earth
One of my favourite quotes (from a photographic "God" of mine, Edward Weston) " the simplest camera has more potential than any photographer will ever exceed."
I shot the 2014 Super Bowl XLVIII flyover, from inside the formation, with a Nikon D700, and Gen1 70-200 f/2.8. The things that saved me more than anything were understanding my subjects (military helicopters), knowing how the pilots would be flying the mission, and being able to read light.
An exercise for those of us who have ever been affected by GAS (gear acquisition syndrome): find youtube videos that sing the praises of the camera/lens you have then go out and make photographs with it.
I've commented this recently on another video: Save your money and go and take a fine art course. Or buy some books on painting. Learn about composition, framing, use of light, contrast, shadows etc. This understanding and knowledge will transform most photographers pictures far more than any new kit. Too many photographers want to believe the difference is the kit, not their artistic skills and knowledge. Photography is art, not tech. Understand the art, not just the tech. Learning how to paint or draw really well is really hard but learning the concepts are not hard at all, transferring those concepts over to photography is really easy if you understand them properly.
I see your point, but in my case upgrading from 5Ds to GFX100 was one of the biggest upgrades, period. Maybe just after switching from 17-40L to 17TS-E. Files are just amazing, after few months i still can't believe i don't need to worry about HDR artifacts because one shot with this camera is just enough. It absolutely changed the way i shoot and edit photos. But then, as you said - bad foto taken with good camera is just a bad photo.
A lot of people, at one time or another, SAY your gear doesn’t matter. You PROVED gear doesn’t matter and convincingly, skilfully drove the point home. Meant something. Thanks.
What an absolute classic of a video….I think people who are hell bent on “needing” the latest gadgets and gizmos are kidding themselves. I recently saw a video from a professional photographer using one of the latest Nikon cameras….his comments were “I don’t need this camera but I want it”…says it all for me. Some time ago I ditched my Nikon gear and everything that went with it and purchased a 9 year old Fujifilm X-T1 and do you know what …I’ve never looked back…my interest has been rekindled again and my knowledge of doing this that and the other with a camera has improved dramatically. Your comments about some of the “older” gear are so true. Thank you.
Reminds me of a challenge that was on UA-cam years ago. Pro photographer, toy camera. Literally a toy camera. And still amazed about the photos some came up with.
There are so many different trolls on the internet regarding photography. There are the trolls that say if your primary income isn't photography then you are not a professional. The trolls who say if you don't shoot RAW exclusively then you are an amateur. Then of course, there are the equipment trolls who say if you don't have the latest and greatest equipment then you simply can't be successful. After years of all this BS, I just don't give a sh%t. I purchase what I need to get the images that please me, and me alone. I think what experience gets you is the ability to understand exactly what it takes to produce the images that you see in your mind. Wasn't that how Ansel Adams did it?
OK you make good points. I'm an amateur generalist photographer and I have been getting great shots for circa 30 years. I loved the rugged durability of my Nikon F4 and F5 back in the day. Nikkor glass was pretty good too, albeit today's Sony GM glass and 61 Mp sensors can reveal a heap more detail than I ever got on Velvia at ISO 50. IMO good technique, an eye or feel for photography and great subjects, composition and lighting are all more important than the camera brand. There have been few bad cameras made since 2000 from any of the major brands. So I get why, to some extent, that a new supposedly better camera can only help to a limited degree and in many situations adds little or nothing extra in order to help one shoot better images. Although a generalist I love skiing and shooting ski action/jump pics. When I shot my D800 with a wide lens I could maybe get 2 out of 3 pics sharp, when subjects were moving towards them away from me. Focusing was slow by today's standards. Later using a D500 I managed a faster shooting rate and got more in focus. Later, post switching to Sony my a9 achieved maybe 8 out of 10 shots sharp at rate I couldn't possibly achieve on early Nikon kit. Now I own an a9iii (amongst several other bodies) with a broad range of expensive GM glass (primes and zooms). Not tried shooting ski action since buying my a9iii, but expect it to help facilitate an much higher level of 'good' shots. OK I doubt that they will be materially better than what I could shoot before, but I will have a higher level of good/keeper shots to choose from. So yes it's progress and better than I ever had before. Did I truly need it? No. Do I like it and am I glad I bought arguably the best 'sports' camera around at the moment? Heck yes! I can afford It so why wouldn't I want to get the best kit going? Would you try to shoot your studio images by candlelight? Probably no.... 'cus it's hard, limiting, albeit potentially creative. Stanley Kubrick managed to shoot his excellent film, Barry Lyndon, by candlelight and pretty fast glass as a creative exercise - so many things are possible with old tech. But..... newer tech kit opens up newer possibilities and makes life easier. So why not embrace it?
Totally agree. Some of the most amazing photos ever taken were on a simple Leica M6 analogue camera with a standard lens. Better equipment does not equal better photography. I made these same mistakes to the point where my camera bag was full of lenses and bodies (weighing 20kgs) and then decided on 'one camera one lens' and my photography improved dramatically as a result. The really big development was the transition from analogue to digital making post processing a breeze.
I found this out some years ago when I experimented with micro-four-thirds gear. Once i understood it i found i could get results that were just as good as my full frame DSLR (shooting dark stages at events). Pretty much any camera made in the last 15 years is amazing!
Great argument. A University Journalism/Communication Arts programme, in my day, (early seventies) required ONLY an Olympus Trip 35, film, and the darkroom. No other camera and or gizmos. A rapid buildup of portfolio was the requirement. The only reason I bought my D7100 was because I missed a huge contract, (~2003 or so) He wouldn't accept scanned images from film even if it was Kodak who did the scanning. Enjoy your blogs. Love that Canon F1! Folk interested in photography are just being led down the path of one-upmanship. Sad state.
Excellent, great real world talk, i started on the 5d (classic) never felt i needed to upgrade, when i did upgrade i discovered ok the auto ISO helped a bit but that was it, and as you mention fun i ended up with a fuji xt1 and that has been my fun camera, they are all only tools just enjoy, oh maybe print some of your photos its a better buzz than any upgrade, cheers for your real world views, love your vids
Very sensible POV again. Got back into photography about 10 years ago with a 1300D and 18-55 plastic kit lens. have since worked my way through a 70D, 7D, 6D (wish I hadn't sold that!) and ended up with a 5DIII with a crop of L lenses (all this lot secondhand, so not bank busting). However, have recently acquired a D700 with a 50 and 85 1.8 - am rather surprised how much I love using it, handling it, and the output is fantastic and am now selling the 5DIII and lenses. I shoot mainly equine sports (as a hobby) and the D700 can do it easily. Its also more fun. Should have bought one years ago and saved a bucket load of pennies. Really ought to get some tutoring and buy some books too (magazines don't count)...
While this may seem to be pedantic, the Lee Miller bath tub photograph wasn't a selfie, but taken by the Life photographer David Scherman. Lee also took one of him in the bath tub, but that, for some reason, hasn't become as famous. That apart I'm really pleased you are continuing this type of post on You tube, I was worried they might end up on your paid for site, which unfortunately isn't something I can afford.
100% agree with you there. I used to work for Jessops and the number of gear freaks I used to serve or work with was amazing. I saw their work quite a lot and it wasn't always great. I occasionally challenged people to take a dirt cheap SLR and a roll of film and go and take some photos of whatever they wanted. The best photographers could always handle it.
I happen to shoot a 5D II mostly with a 24-70L and a 10 megapixel Nikon D200. These cameras fit my eye. I’ve never had anyone that likes my photos say that these are crap cameras so I don’t know why there’s so much pressure for new gear. What’s funny is that I’ve been doing research for years on my next moneys-no-object modern day camera but I still haven’t decided…maybe next year.
This is ace, Scott. You've saved me a ton of money previously and have just done it again, the 80D lives to see another couple of years! Lot's to think about in here, thanks for your work.
I mainly shoot Rugby, and do some PWR games..I use a pair second had Canon 1DX iii , I'm very happy with the DSLRs and don't need the latest mirrorless gear, 20 mp and 14 FPS is enough and I mainly use single focus point.... I do love my EF 400 2.8 mk2 lens though, I still feel good glass makes a difference. Having twin CF express slots to record to both is nice as a backup but I've not had an issues with CF Express card yet.
So true. I have a near library of books from people who came before me. Mirrorless make stuff easier, but not impossible. More photographers need to buy books
I did three seasons of MX Photography with an 5Dii without any problems. Last season I started to film these events as well and for that a DSLM really makes a difference...
This is absolutely true! I used to own the 5d mk2 back in the day. I primarily do street and outdoor photography but I had a close friend that started a wedding photography business. I helped her out on her first few photo shoots and the images I got with that camera were stunning! The only reason I moved off that camera was to shrink my kit to something that fits the stuff I want to do, but even my current camera is over 8 years old! If I were to start a wedding photography business today I'd almost 100% get a used 5d mk2, the 50, 85 and an 18-35 zoom and call it a day. If you can't build a business off that then maybe photography isn't for you. There's an oversaturation with cameras and everyone is chasing specs instead of getting out and creating images.
💯, although I would do the 6D just just get the wider dynamic range. Put that thing on auto iso and it's set and forget, and you can make life a little easier.
Ok, I’m finally getting the GFX 100S, can’t wait any longer! It took me 5 years of hard work to get here. Quick question: how big of a difference is the autofocus between the 100S, 100S II, and 100 II? I shoot food and lifestyle, and I’m coming from full frame. Is the 100S enough, or should I consider the newer models?
My wedding setup was Fuji Film, ISO 125, Contax Quartz, Metz 45 CT5, Lens either 50 mm or 70-210 Zoom. At most 72 frames. No auto focus. Never owned a digital until 3 years ago.
Your spot on I’ve been saying this for almost a decade and these people are absolute gear hungry which is fine, but it does not make anything better. Yes, we all loved the new gear and we all promote it, but do you need? It is a very different thing it’s more than want than the need.
This reminds me of the old saying wedding photographers hear from guests, "You have an amazing expensive camera, that must be why your photos are so good." Take the same subject, lights and camera and give it to 10 different photographers and you will get 10 completely different images. The photographer makes the shot. The camera is tool the same way a light is a tool. If you camera is more important than you are then you just make yourself into a tool.
I think it sometimes all it takes is for us to actually spend a lot of money on the kit we think we need to realise we actually don’t Despite watching many videos for many years it still took me it to do well in my career and buy a lot of kit that I thought I need to strip it back down to the bare minimum.
I agree specs don't matter. What matters however is how you feel with a camera (very same as with a musical instrument). I make my best work on a rangefinder because how it makes me see and feel. It inspires me differently than say a mirrorless, and for me that has more value than megapixels.
Totally agree with you. We have all been there. However I am in the process of upgrading my kit due to weight. I am over 60 and although my old gear is more than good enough, my back isn't.
Yep had this conversation with a famous photo content maker just a few weeks ago. Having any camera does not make anyone a photographer. It what you do with it.
I shot weddings for several years using an RB67 with a metz CL4 strapped to the side and a cheap sekonic light meter. I used the same camera for my black and white topographic landscape photography.
knowing what your camera is capable of is the important part and play to its strengths, same with any tool of any trade, note, a photographer known for/by their camera, Horst Hamann (leica Rangefinder) shooting super verticals! his work is fantastic!
excellent, thank you. I am an amateur but find your videos very thought provoking. I need a small camera otherwise I often can't be bothered to pick it up when I go out. In 1981 it was an Olympus XA, still works; today it is an Olympus EP 7. In between have been various full frame APSC 6x9 film etc. they gather dust.
Thanks for this Scott, I dropped my camera in the sea and they told me they can't fix it so I'm looking at new cameras. But do I need the latest model for what I shoot? No, probably not, and my bank balance will thank me for it! It's nice to think a new camera will make my photos a 1000% better but sadly that isn't gonna happen!
I agree that camera doesn’t matter. I personally shot my best work using a 4mp Canon years ago. Granted, my work with my Mamiya RZ67 exceeds the size prints I could have ever made with my older Canon with 4mp but for computer monitors or phones the Canon is more than sufficient. Having said that I also use a Hasselblad H5Dc 50mp and I love what it produces.
Me photographing 2 federal politicians opening a new medical department & unveiling the plaque in a tight confinement with a Canon 200d & its 55-250mm & a sigma 30mm felt very much an amateur, compared to the bloke next to me for the local newspaper with 2 Canon R3 slung over his shoulders one with a 70-200 f2.8 & the other with a 24-70 f2.8 but i got the job done & the client got all the images they requested in the brief. One of the politicians used the other guys plaque unveiling images on her socials, and to be honest as we were next to each other at that particular time i actually thought she had somehow got hold of my image because you literally couldn't tell the difference.
When I got my first "real" camera I took a class with a NatGeo landscape photographer. First day and last day the whole class went out in the parking lot, students with their shiny new gear, instructor with a disposable 35mm. We all got better, but he won both times, hands down.
Thank you for this. Much appreciated. Substitute drum sets, golf clubs, F1 cars LOL. Last question I asked, if I ever even asked, was, what brand was that paintbrush?
Once you have tried a camera with focus peaking etc there is no going back… I went from a 1dx to an R6 and it is superior in almost every way except using the camera as a hammer
@whatcouldgowrong7914 I do like the "analog-ness" of the 5D2. I used to shoot 35mm in the 80s and 90s, so this 5D2 is like alien futuristic technology to me. I do like the R6 MKII.
@@Twobarpsi It is nice I agree if you like slow shooting styles. That said I shoot infrared now and the revolution of mirrorless and seeing exactly what the sensor sees has been a big change and allows me to frame my shots with more intention
Hope you have watched the film Lee. It implies it wasn't a selfie. She styled it, but David Scherman pressed the shutter. My favourite of her photos is the girls with the fire watch masks.
I have an Olympus EM1X not the best camera in the world but I love it. I'm no means a professional but I love doing concert photography, I recently did some for my favourite bands and it managed brilliantly. A friend was there with a Canon R5, were her photos any better?? no!! Could you tell which pictures were taken on which camera?? No!! I know my camera has some limitations but I concentrate on what I Can do and not what I Can't do.
I'm always telling students that I mentor that before you upgrade, you need to outshoot the gear you have. Especially for sports, timing is everything, assuming you have a good grasp on exposure. As a sports and portrait photographer, I rather have a slower frame rate and a higher ISO capability then 20 to 30 frames per second any day
It’s more about being there at the right time learning to use your instincts rather then relying on gear Subject matter over megapixels or dynamic range
Always love a new Scott video; always interesting, direct and presenting something to think about! Did my racetrack photography pre-focusing a manual lens at a spot on the track or curb; then wait for the cars ... no need to 1/80.000 sec. ;-)
I liked what you said! Twenty years ago I did many weddings with a Nikon D70 and 18-70 kit lens, and regularly sold 16x20 bridal portraits. I knew my work was good in that several time I did multiple sisters in the same family. Would anybody shoot a wedding now with a 6 mp D70?
agree.. people forget that the cameras they sh*t on nowadays, like the 5d canons mentioned.. were the TOP OF THE LINE cameras for those 'wedding photographers' back then and weddings were still shot :D photographers got paid, clients were happy, life went on using the 'top gear' :))) IT WAS POSSIBLE back then.. it's possible today... with any brick you pick up. so .. I would say suit YOUR budget, pick the brand you want/like and listen less to youtubers hyping you up for the latest finest MOST EXPENSIVE.. hey if you have money, by all means.. i work for money, it doesn't grow on trees in my backyard so... i dont buy the cheapest, i dont buy most expensive... good video
As a professional photographer I only have equipment that I need for the job. If you are a weekend warrior then you can get what you like and just have some fun as you will also help to keep the photo inderstry in business thank U! LOL
I think there is a big difference between yes you can do it and do you want to do it. You can build yourself a house with only a handsaw and a hammer, but you would be much better off doing it with modern power tools all things being equal. I think people get caught up in thinking wants are needs. You need something when you can not readily accomplish your goals with the tools you have on hand.
I don't know about others, but what Annie presented in that book, IS NOT sports photography just because there are portraits of athletes. For sports, yeah, you can get a shot with a manual focus camera, but can you get 20 images from a soccer game to be included in the article of "match of the day"?
@@TinHouseStudioUK i am not aware of his work. but let's not confuse assignment work for some entity on special occasions, to day by day job. Sports are a different kind of photography where you need fast acquisition focus and high frame rate (not for all, ofc) and dedicated cameras will help the photographer a lot. I still shoot football from time to time with an F100, but with autofocus lenses, so yeah, you can do it without the "latest and greatest" PS: my goal camera is a D700 :)
@@estwern Pre digital and auto focus, sports photographers mostly had a motor drive of about 5 frames per second, there were some cameras that had huge rolls of film and the photographers had their photographs published in sports magazines and news papers. Calenders and posters of action shots.
@@philliphickox4023 yes, and in those 5 frames, with a reasonable f stop, all action happening most of the time in daylight, they get some kinda' sharp pictures that were published on the cheapest paper with a disastrous resolution. until 7 years ago, F1 cars didn't have HALO system to protect the head of the driver. Should they still drive without it just because at some point others drivers did survive without it? This is technology, it evolves, even some of us can work and deliver with older stuff.
Im just an amateur/ hobbyist, years ago i on occasions used to shoot formula 2 stock car racing for a sponsor with a Praktica MTL3, he had quite afew of those shots on his office walls, one or two at A3 size, one on his wall was shot in failing light with a long pan , i still have that camera, the only one i kept from those days and recently started using it again, on the enjoyment of using a particular camera i bought an OM1 and 3 pro zooms for my retirement present after selling my beloved penf, not long after i picked up an old E3 cheap, that old E3 is my favorite camera, itsca joy to use as is the old Praktica plus a few other film cameras ive picked up since using film again
Dude, this 100+ frames per second thing baffles me. I can't believe people want that. That sounds like actual Hell. Whenever I've leaned on the shutter and sprayed and prayed a little too much and I see 4-5 pictures that look -almost- the same, my heart sinks.
One of my cameras has a U1 and a U2 mode. I can't recall what I set them up for U1 is probably for normal, U 2 probably for action. I would appreciate a global sensor, but only if it is as good as film.
When you see these old digitalrev videos where they send a pro photographer on a mission with the worst cameras ever imagined - there were still amazing photographs. A good photographer can work around limitations or use them to enhance the craft. It's like comparing your camera to the pots and pans, spoons and forks, oven and salamanders of a chef. Will the meal become better with the new pot or stove?
Completely true and I completely agree... buying new kit does not at all improve my photography or make me a better photographer... I keep buying more kit though 😂🤦♂
Seems to me, the biggest problem is hobbyists who think they're pros (photography is riddled with Dunning-Krugerists), or hobbyists who become commercial photographers whilst still having a hobbyist mindset. They love cameras, not photography. Everything is a rationalisation of that.
Oh dear - what terrible timing! I'm watching this (having just ordered a new mirrorless earlier today.) On the positive side - it's a cheap & cheerful used Nikon Z5 and I'm not dumping my DSLRs.
My newest bit of kit is 15 years old, and it wasn't that great then! I've shot magazine covers with it, against guys with great gear. Do we want the kit? Yes. Do we need it? No. If anything, working with limitations increases your skill, if you want to compete.
I agree with your sentiments but I think your approach to it in this video could do with changing. I suspect you probably lost a lot of people by the time you got to the last part (which is the important bit) mind you I dont think you will change many people's thoughts.... the upgrade lure will still pull most people. I use a Canon G10 (a 16 year old camera) because a really like it, the images are more than good enough for my purposes, I can use filters via a lensmate adapter (I could go on but for me its a perfect single camera tool)
The difference is between being a photographer and a bloke with a camera. I am the latter but I admire the former. It's my hobby not my living. One day I might be as good as the Z6 not the other way round.
I have been heavily influenced by the work of a well known photographer in my home city. I have his book of images from a 30 year career. Looking at my own work, many of my photos of similar subjects using a mirrorless with a high quality lens are technically superior. Problem is, they are sharp, low noise, great colour/ BW with perfect levels and verticals but .... soulless.
Can't disagree with any of that. Photographers need to admit that they buy gear because they like shiny new stuff, and get over the belief that their camera is somehow going to make them the greatest thing since sliced bread. Photography is all about what you know and can bring out of the subject. A great photographer will always be able to shoot better images with the average kit than an average photographer can with a great kit.
If you want to learn more about taking photographs from still life through to portraiture at a much more in depth level than youtube allows, head here tinhouse-studio.com/studio-access/
One of the main reason why I stuck with the channel Scott because you are you!
I agree with Scott-camera choice doesn’t matter that much.
My priority was the lens, not the camera body, which is why I chose the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8.
As an event photographer in Brussels, Belgium, specializing in political and cultural events, I need gear that’s practical and versatile. Since I’m not a fan of the Nikon mirrorless lineup, I opted for Sony (this lens is compatible with both systems). The Tamron 35-150mm is ideal for my work, sparing me the hassle of carrying the typical 24-70mm and 70-200mm kit. Ultimately, it’s not the camera that matters-practicality is everything.
Tin House Studio is one of the best photography infotainment channels.
I love the relaxed, casual vibe of this couch setup-much better than a formal studio feel.
"If William Eggleston can do it wit a Leica and roll of Kodakchrome, and I can't even get close with a 100 MP technical camera, what does that tell you of the importance of photography".... I think that is the most accurate truth of photography, period. Excellent video, very down to earth
One of my favourite quotes (from a photographic "God" of mine, Edward Weston) " the simplest camera has more potential than any photographer will ever exceed."
I shot the 2014 Super Bowl XLVIII flyover, from inside the formation, with a Nikon D700, and Gen1 70-200 f/2.8. The things that saved me more than anything were understanding my subjects (military helicopters), knowing how the pilots would be flying the mission, and being able to read light.
An exercise for those of us who have ever been affected by GAS (gear acquisition syndrome): find youtube videos that sing the praises of the camera/lens you have then go out and make photographs with it.
@@SteveBonario knowing me, I’d end up buying a second one 😂
I do that exact thing. :)
Instructions unclear. Now using a Cambo for sports.
@@WhenWillILearn Ha ha ha...brilliant!!
@@SteveBonario As someone with severe GAS, I think I understand... Basically your saying sell everything (apart from my gear) and buy a UA-cam?
I've commented this recently on another video: Save your money and go and take a fine art course. Or buy some books on painting. Learn about composition, framing, use of light, contrast, shadows etc. This understanding and knowledge will transform most photographers pictures far more than any new kit. Too many photographers want to believe the difference is the kit, not their artistic skills and knowledge. Photography is art, not tech. Understand the art, not just the tech. Learning how to paint or draw really well is really hard but learning the concepts are not hard at all, transferring those concepts over to photography is really easy if you understand them properly.
What art courses would you suggest to get started with ?
I see your point, but in my case upgrading from 5Ds to GFX100 was one of the biggest upgrades, period. Maybe just after switching from 17-40L to 17TS-E. Files are just amazing, after few months i still can't believe i don't need to worry about HDR artifacts because one shot with this camera is just enough. It absolutely changed the way i shoot and edit photos. But then, as you said - bad foto taken with good camera is just a bad photo.
I went same path. The GFX has to last 10yrs min before next purchase. Still shoot with my old 1DSmk3
Under this video I'm being shown an ad for a 5D mk IV - brilliant :)
Everything you said - true.
There is a difference between "nice to have/more useful/faster/fancier" and "necessity"
A lot of people, at one time or another, SAY your gear doesn’t matter. You PROVED gear doesn’t matter and convincingly, skilfully drove the point home. Meant something. Thanks.
Some Zack Arias levels of TRUTH spoken in this video. ❤
What an absolute classic of a video….I think people who are hell bent on “needing” the latest gadgets and gizmos are kidding themselves. I recently saw a video from a professional photographer using one of the latest Nikon cameras….his comments were “I don’t need this camera but I want it”…says it all for me. Some time ago I ditched my Nikon gear and everything that went with it and purchased a 9 year old Fujifilm X-T1 and do you know what …I’ve never looked back…my interest has been rekindled again and my knowledge of doing this that and the other with a camera has improved dramatically. Your comments about some of the “older” gear are so true. Thank you.
Reminds me of a challenge that was on UA-cam years ago.
Pro photographer, toy camera.
Literally a toy camera.
And still amazed about the photos some came up with.
@@pd1jdw630 I remember that.
There are so many different trolls on the internet regarding photography. There are the trolls that say if your primary income isn't photography then you are not a professional. The trolls who say if you don't shoot RAW exclusively then you are an amateur. Then of course, there are the equipment trolls who say if you don't have the latest and greatest equipment then you simply can't be successful. After years of all this BS, I just don't give a sh%t. I purchase what I need to get the images that please me, and me alone. I think what experience gets you is the ability to understand exactly what it takes to produce the images that you see in your mind. Wasn't that how Ansel Adams did it?
OK you make good points. I'm an amateur generalist photographer and I have been getting great shots for circa 30 years. I loved the rugged durability of my Nikon F4 and F5 back in the day. Nikkor glass was pretty good too, albeit today's Sony GM glass and 61 Mp sensors can reveal a heap more detail than I ever got on Velvia at ISO 50.
IMO good technique, an eye or feel for photography and great subjects, composition and lighting are all more important than the camera brand. There have been few bad cameras made since 2000 from any of the major brands. So I get why, to some extent, that a new supposedly better camera can only help to a limited degree and in many situations adds little or nothing extra in order to help one shoot better images.
Although a generalist I love skiing and shooting ski action/jump pics. When I shot my D800 with a wide lens I could maybe get 2 out of 3 pics sharp, when subjects were moving towards them away from me. Focusing was slow by today's standards. Later using a D500 I managed a faster shooting rate and got more in focus. Later, post switching to Sony my a9 achieved maybe 8 out of 10 shots sharp at rate I couldn't possibly achieve on early Nikon kit. Now I own an a9iii (amongst several other bodies) with a broad range of expensive GM glass (primes and zooms). Not tried shooting ski action since buying my a9iii, but expect it to help facilitate an much higher level of 'good' shots. OK I doubt that they will be materially better than what I could shoot before, but I will have a higher level of good/keeper shots to choose from. So yes it's progress and better than I ever had before.
Did I truly need it? No. Do I like it and am I glad I bought arguably the best 'sports' camera around at the moment? Heck yes! I can afford It so why wouldn't I want to get the best kit going?
Would you try to shoot your studio images by candlelight? Probably no.... 'cus it's hard, limiting, albeit potentially creative. Stanley Kubrick managed to shoot his excellent film, Barry Lyndon, by candlelight and pretty fast glass as a creative exercise - so many things are possible with old tech. But..... newer tech kit opens up newer possibilities and makes life easier. So why not embrace it?
Totally agree. Some of the most amazing photos ever taken were on a simple Leica M6 analogue camera with a standard lens. Better equipment does not equal better photography. I made these same mistakes to the point where my camera bag was full of lenses and bodies (weighing 20kgs) and then decided on 'one camera one lens' and my photography improved dramatically as a result. The really big development was the transition from analogue to digital making post processing a breeze.
I found this out some years ago when I experimented with micro-four-thirds gear. Once i understood it i found i could get results that were just as good as my full frame DSLR (shooting dark stages at events). Pretty much any camera made in the last 15 years is amazing!
No. Your camera matters. It SURELY matters.
It just doesn't matter as much as your actual skills with regard to photography.
Great argument. A University Journalism/Communication Arts programme, in my day, (early seventies) required ONLY an Olympus Trip 35, film, and the darkroom. No other camera and or gizmos. A rapid buildup of portfolio was the requirement. The only reason I bought my D7100 was because I missed a huge contract, (~2003 or so) He wouldn't accept scanned images from film even if it was Kodak who did the scanning. Enjoy your blogs. Love that Canon F1! Folk interested in photography are just being led down the path of one-upmanship. Sad state.
Excellent, great real world talk, i started on the 5d (classic) never felt i needed to upgrade, when i did upgrade i discovered ok the auto ISO helped a bit but that was it, and as you mention fun i ended up with a fuji xt1 and that has been my fun camera, they are all only tools just enjoy, oh maybe print some of your photos its a better buzz than any upgrade, cheers for your real world views, love your vids
Very sensible POV again. Got back into photography about 10 years ago with a 1300D and 18-55 plastic kit lens. have since worked my way through a 70D, 7D, 6D (wish I hadn't sold that!) and ended up with a 5DIII with a crop of L lenses (all this lot secondhand, so not bank busting). However, have recently acquired a D700 with a 50 and 85 1.8 - am rather surprised how much I love using it, handling it, and the output is fantastic and am now selling the 5DIII and lenses. I shoot mainly equine sports (as a hobby) and the D700 can do it easily. Its also more fun. Should have bought one years ago and saved a bucket load of pennies.
Really ought to get some tutoring and buy some books too (magazines don't count)...
Preaching to the choir! I knew right from the start I don't _need_ any camera. But we _wants_ them, my precious...
Whatever camera you have now was at one point the top of the line camera tech.
I always love your videos attacking the gear obsession. This is another one to love. :-)
Spot on!
As confirmed by any photographer's work prior to ~1990, say.
While this may seem to be pedantic, the Lee Miller bath tub photograph wasn't a selfie, but taken by the Life photographer David Scherman. Lee also took one of him in the bath tub, but that, for some reason, hasn't become as famous. That apart I'm really pleased you are continuing this type of post on You tube, I was worried they might end up on your paid for site, which unfortunately isn't something I can afford.
I've watched so many of your videos lately that you are literally my conscience at this point.
I worked with a photographer that shot 4x5 fashion often with strong motion.
100% agree with you there. I used to work for Jessops and the number of gear freaks I used to serve or work with was amazing. I saw their work quite a lot and it wasn't always great. I occasionally challenged people to take a dirt cheap SLR and a roll of film and go and take some photos of whatever they wanted. The best photographers could always handle it.
I happen to shoot a 5D II mostly with a 24-70L and a 10 megapixel Nikon D200. These cameras fit my eye. I’ve never had anyone that likes my photos say that these are crap cameras so I don’t know why there’s so much pressure for new gear. What’s funny is that I’ve been doing research for years on my next moneys-no-object modern day camera but I still haven’t decided…maybe next year.
This is ace, Scott. You've saved me a ton of money previously and have just done it again, the 80D lives to see another couple of years! Lot's to think about in here, thanks for your work.
Glad to help!
I mainly shoot Rugby, and do some PWR games..I use a pair second had Canon 1DX iii , I'm very happy with the DSLRs and don't need the latest mirrorless gear, 20 mp and 14 FPS is enough and I mainly use single focus point.... I do love my EF 400 2.8 mk2 lens though, I still feel good glass makes a difference. Having twin CF express slots to record to both is nice as a backup but I've not had an issues with CF Express card yet.
100% agree with you. Cameras and lenses are tools for a photographer to learn how to use and use well.
So true. I have a near library of books from people who came before me. Mirrorless make stuff easier, but not impossible. More photographers need to buy books
I did three seasons of MX Photography with an 5Dii without any problems. Last season I started to film these events as well and for that a DSLM really makes a difference...
This is absolutely true! I used to own the 5d mk2 back in the day. I primarily do street and outdoor photography but I had a close friend that started a wedding photography business. I helped her out on her first few photo shoots and the images I got with that camera were stunning! The only reason I moved off that camera was to shrink my kit to something that fits the stuff I want to do, but even my current camera is over 8 years old! If I were to start a wedding photography business today I'd almost 100% get a used 5d mk2, the 50, 85 and an 18-35 zoom and call it a day. If you can't build a business off that then maybe photography isn't for you. There's an oversaturation with cameras and everyone is chasing specs instead of getting out and creating images.
💯, although I would do the 6D just just get the wider dynamic range. Put that thing on auto iso and it's set and forget, and you can make life a little easier.
Ok, I’m finally getting the GFX 100S, can’t wait any longer! It took me 5 years of hard work to get here. Quick question: how big of a difference is the autofocus between the 100S, 100S II, and 100 II? I shoot food and lifestyle, and I’m coming from full frame. Is the 100S enough, or should I consider the newer models?
My wedding setup was Fuji Film, ISO 125, Contax Quartz, Metz 45 CT5, Lens either 50 mm or 70-210 Zoom. At most 72 frames. No auto focus. Never owned a digital until 3 years ago.
Your spot on I’ve been saying this for almost a decade and these people are absolute gear hungry which is fine, but it does not make anything better. Yes, we all loved the new gear and we all promote it, but do you need? It is a very different thing it’s more than want than the need.
I use a 5Dii and a 1DXmk1 and I never needed anything else.... this kit rocks the boat as long as I use good glass.
Who else smiled at 11:23
This reminds me of the old saying wedding photographers hear from guests, "You have an amazing expensive camera, that must be why your photos are so good." Take the same subject, lights and camera and give it to 10 different photographers and you will get 10 completely different images. The photographer makes the shot. The camera is tool the same way a light is a tool. If you camera is more important than you are then you just make yourself into a tool.
I think it sometimes all it takes is for us to actually spend a lot of money on the kit we think we need to realise we actually don’t
Despite watching many videos for many years it still took me it to do well in my career and buy a lot of kit that I thought I need to strip it back down to the bare minimum.
I agree specs don't matter. What matters however is how you feel with a camera (very same as with a musical instrument). I make my best work on a rangefinder because how it makes me see and feel. It inspires me differently than say a mirrorless, and for me that has more value than megapixels.
Totally agree with you. We have all been there. However I am in the process of upgrading my kit due to weight. I am over 60 and although my old gear is more than good enough, my back isn't.
Enjoyed every second of this. Favorite so far.
I like your takes, and the rings of colourful tapes.
Yep had this conversation with a famous photo content maker just a few weeks ago. Having any camera does not make anyone a photographer. It what you do with it.
I shot weddings for several years using an RB67 with a metz CL4 strapped to the side and a cheap sekonic light meter. I used the same camera for my black and white topographic landscape photography.
Fully agree. I just had a really big picture published in The Guardian ...... taken with a GoPro.
knowing what your camera is capable of is the important part and play to its strengths, same with any tool of any trade, note, a photographer known for/by their camera, Horst Hamann (leica Rangefinder) shooting super verticals! his work is fantastic!
excellent, thank you. I am an amateur but find your videos very thought provoking. I need a small camera otherwise I often can't be bothered to pick it up when I go out. In 1981 it was an Olympus XA, still works; today it is an Olympus EP 7. In between have been various full frame APSC 6x9 film etc. they gather dust.
Some solid truths there .
Great video .
Thanks for this Scott, I dropped my camera in the sea and they told me they can't fix it so I'm looking at new cameras. But do I need the latest model for what I shoot? No, probably not, and my bank balance will thank me for it! It's nice to think a new camera will make my photos a 1000% better but sadly that isn't gonna happen!
I agree that camera doesn’t matter. I personally shot my best work using a 4mp Canon years ago. Granted, my work with my Mamiya RZ67 exceeds the size prints I could have ever made with my older Canon with 4mp but for computer monitors or phones the Canon is more than sufficient. Having said that I also use a Hasselblad H5Dc 50mp and I love what it produces.
Me photographing 2 federal politicians opening a new medical department & unveiling the plaque in a tight confinement with a Canon 200d & its 55-250mm & a sigma 30mm felt very much an amateur, compared to the bloke next to me for the local newspaper with 2 Canon R3 slung over his shoulders one with a 70-200 f2.8 & the other with a 24-70 f2.8 but i got the job done & the client got all the images they requested in the brief. One of the politicians used the other guys plaque unveiling images on her socials, and to be honest as we were next to each other at that particular time i actually thought she had somehow got hold of my image because you literally couldn't tell the difference.
When I got my first "real" camera I took a class with a NatGeo landscape photographer. First day and last day the whole class went out in the parking lot, students with their shiny new gear, instructor with a disposable 35mm.
We all got better, but he won both times, hands down.
I smiled!!
Thank you :) I needed to hear this!
Thank you for this. Much appreciated. Substitute drum sets, golf clubs, F1 cars LOL.
Last question I asked, if I ever even asked, was, what brand was that paintbrush?
With the budget to buy a R5, I chose the 5D MKII. I have yet to run into a situation where the body was a limiting factor.
Once you have tried a camera with focus peaking etc there is no going back… I went from a 1dx to an R6 and it is superior in almost every way except using the camera as a hammer
@whatcouldgowrong7914 I do like the "analog-ness" of the 5D2. I used to shoot 35mm in the 80s and 90s, so this 5D2 is like alien futuristic technology to me. I do like the R6 MKII.
@@Twobarpsi It is nice I agree if you like slow shooting styles. That said I shoot infrared now and the revolution of mirrorless and seeing exactly what the sensor sees has been a big change and allows me to frame my shots with more intention
Always an inspiration to me and my 5d MKII and old lenses.
Same here, 5Dii and good glass rock the boat, still my backup body.
Hope you have watched the film Lee. It implies it wasn't a selfie. She styled it, but David Scherman pressed the shutter. My favourite of her photos is the girls with the fire watch masks.
I have an Olympus EM1X not the best camera in the world but I love it. I'm no means a professional but I love doing concert photography, I recently did some for my favourite bands and it managed brilliantly. A friend was there with a Canon R5, were her photos any better?? no!! Could you tell which pictures were taken on which camera?? No!! I know my camera has some limitations but I concentrate on what I Can do and not what I Can't do.
I'm always telling students that I mentor that before you upgrade, you need to outshoot the gear you have. Especially for sports, timing is everything, assuming you have a good grasp on exposure. As a sports and portrait photographer, I rather have a slower frame rate and a higher ISO capability then 20 to 30 frames per second any day
Agree. The only time gear matters to me is for two reasons…makes my workflow better, and the joy of use.
It’s more about being there at the right time learning to use your instincts rather then relying on gear
Subject matter over megapixels or dynamic range
Always love a new Scott video; always interesting, direct and presenting something to think about!
Did my racetrack photography pre-focusing a manual lens at a spot on the track or curb; then wait for the cars ... no need to 1/80.000 sec. ;-)
Thanks a lot
I liked what you said! Twenty years ago I did many weddings with a Nikon D70 and 18-70 kit lens, and regularly sold 16x20 bridal portraits. I knew my work was good in that several time I did multiple sisters in the same family. Would anybody shoot a wedding now with a 6 mp D70?
Screenshots of video will be the future of modern day photography.
agree.. people forget that the cameras they sh*t on nowadays, like the 5d canons mentioned.. were the TOP OF THE LINE cameras for those 'wedding photographers' back then and weddings were still shot :D photographers got paid, clients were happy, life went on using the 'top gear' :))) IT WAS POSSIBLE back then.. it's possible today... with any brick you pick up. so .. I would say suit YOUR budget, pick the brand you want/like and listen less to youtubers hyping you up for the latest finest MOST EXPENSIVE.. hey if you have money, by all means.. i work for money, it doesn't grow on trees in my backyard so... i dont buy the cheapest, i dont buy most expensive... good video
You just saved me a heap of money. Thanks.
Totally agree on cameras. But: does your theory also apply to studio equipment?
"No photographer is as good as the simplest camera." - Edward Steichen
As a professional photographer I only have equipment that I need for the job. If you are a weekend warrior then you can get what you like and just have some fun as you will also help to keep the photo inderstry in business thank U! LOL
Scott you’d be mad at me bruv, I just bought a Fujifilm XT5 and it was pricey 😅
I think there is a big difference between yes you can do it and do you want to do it. You can build yourself a house with only a handsaw and a hammer, but you would be much better off doing it with modern power tools all things being equal. I think people get caught up in thinking wants are needs. You need something when you can not readily accomplish your goals with the tools you have on hand.
Sports with a hard to use film camera, stunning images... David Burnett.
I don't know about others, but what Annie presented in that book, IS NOT sports photography just because there are portraits of athletes. For sports, yeah, you can get a shot with a manual focus camera, but can you get 20 images from a soccer game to be included in the article of "match of the day"?
David Burnett
@@TinHouseStudioUK i am not aware of his work. but let's not confuse assignment work for some entity on special occasions, to day by day job. Sports are a different kind of photography where you need fast acquisition focus and high frame rate (not for all, ofc) and dedicated cameras will help the photographer a lot. I still shoot football from time to time with an F100, but with autofocus lenses, so yeah, you can do it without the "latest and greatest" PS: my goal camera is a D700 :)
@@estwern Pre digital and auto focus, sports photographers mostly had a motor drive of about 5 frames per second, there were some cameras that had huge rolls of film and the photographers had their photographs published in sports magazines and news papers. Calenders and posters of action shots.
@@philliphickox4023 yes, and in those 5 frames, with a reasonable f stop, all action happening most of the time in daylight, they get some kinda' sharp pictures that were published on the cheapest paper with a disastrous resolution. until 7 years ago, F1 cars didn't have HALO system to protect the head of the driver. Should they still drive without it just because at some point others drivers did survive without it? This is technology, it evolves, even some of us can work and deliver with older stuff.
Im just an amateur/ hobbyist, years ago i on occasions used to shoot formula 2 stock car racing for a sponsor with a Praktica MTL3, he had quite afew of those shots on his office walls, one or two at A3 size, one on his wall was shot in failing light with a long pan , i still have that camera, the only one i kept from those days and recently started using it again, on the enjoyment of using a particular camera i bought an OM1 and 3 pro zooms for my retirement present after selling my beloved penf, not long after i picked up an old E3 cheap, that old E3 is my favorite camera, itsca joy to use as is the old Praktica plus a few other film cameras ive picked up since using film again
Dude, this 100+ frames per second thing baffles me. I can't believe people want that. That sounds like actual Hell. Whenever I've leaned on the shutter and sprayed and prayed a little too much and I see 4-5 pictures that look -almost- the same, my heart sinks.
One of my cameras has a U1 and a U2 mode. I can't recall what I set them up for U1 is probably for normal, U 2 probably for action. I would appreciate a global sensor, but only if it is as good as film.
When you see these old digitalrev videos where they send a pro photographer on a mission with the worst cameras ever imagined - there were still amazing photographs. A good photographer can work around limitations or use them to enhance the craft. It's like comparing your camera to the pots and pans, spoons and forks, oven and salamanders of a chef. Will the meal become better with the new pot or stove?
How's that laowa tilt shift working out?
The LEE film is amazing if anyone here hasn’t seen it. Her work is awesome
Completely true and I completely agree... buying new kit does not at all improve my photography or make me a better photographer... I keep buying more kit though 😂🤦♂
Seems to me, the biggest problem is hobbyists who think they're pros (photography is riddled with Dunning-Krugerists), or hobbyists who become commercial photographers whilst still having a hobbyist mindset. They love cameras, not photography. Everything is a rationalisation of that.
Oh dear - what terrible timing! I'm watching this (having just ordered a new mirrorless earlier today.) On the positive side - it's a cheap & cheerful used Nikon Z5 and I'm not dumping my DSLRs.
Love this. Same in tennis: the racquet does not make the player. Cannot agree more.
My most awarded photo was shot with 8 megapixel camera 👍🏻
I use a battered D700. It's all I need, and yes I do sell a fair bit of work.
My newest bit of kit is 15 years old, and it wasn't that great then! I've shot magazine covers with it, against guys with great gear.
Do we want the kit? Yes. Do we need it? No.
If anything, working with limitations increases your skill, if you want to compete.
Seen the Lee film , great stuff.
I’ve not seen it yet. Looking forward to it though
I love my 5d mk2 i got 2 years ago, battery grip, 5 batteries, case all for $150
I agree with your sentiments but I think your approach to it in this video could do with changing. I suspect you probably lost a lot of people by the time you got to the last part (which is the important bit) mind you I dont think you will change many people's thoughts.... the upgrade lure will still pull most people. I use a Canon G10 (a 16 year old camera) because a really like it, the images are more than good enough for my purposes, I can use filters via a lensmate adapter (I could go on but for me its a perfect single camera tool)
Can't beat a canon F1 for film. Have one myself and use it all the time.
The difference is between being a photographer and a bloke with a camera. I am the latter but I admire the former. It's my hobby not my living. One day I might be as good as the Z6 not the other way round.
Nothing will make you a great photographer but effort, and it still might not happen.
I have been heavily influenced by the work of a well known photographer in my home city. I have his book of images from a 30 year career. Looking at my own work, many of my photos of similar subjects using a mirrorless with a high quality lens are technically superior. Problem is, they are sharp, low noise, great colour/ BW with perfect levels and verticals but .... soulless.
Can't disagree with any of that. Photographers need to admit that they buy gear because they like shiny new stuff, and get over the belief that their camera is somehow going to make them the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Photography is all about what you know and can bring out of the subject. A great photographer will always be able to shoot better images with the average kit than an average photographer can with a great kit.