I received a PM and as the reply was going to take a while, it seemed better to share than keep to oneself, I have deliberately not revealed who sent it, but I don't mind if they want to reply, anonomously or otherwise.
Not to worry, no offence taken and I do understand the question.Hi Dave
I'm going to ask you a question that could sound impolite.
But being impolite isn't for sure my intention.
I saw in some of your shots that you use a consumer grade camera and lenses.
I'm quite surprised of that, because usually skilled and long experienced photographers use only (at least mainly) equipment of the highest level.
For sure, often the equipment is too professional for the use that the photographer can do with, I'm an example.
Do you think that consumer-grade camera and lenses are most of the time equivalent to the pro-grade ones? Could there be a condition where the pro-grade equipment is necessary? (and the consumer-grade one not adequate to that condition?)
I hope my question is quite clear, and I'm sorry if it could hurt you in any way, please feel free to do not answer if you think so.
Many thanks for all the times you have helped me directly and indirectly with your posts.
Have a nice day
Firstly, for the camera body, I don't believe there is any significant difference between pro and consumer level equipment in respect of image quality of similar sensor spec taking 'normal' pictures. The differences are mainly ergonomic, build quality/weather proofing and high iso/noise performance - and the last isn't often needed.
So yes, in extremes, the body can allow you to continue shooting when, with a consumer body, you'll have to give up because the camera may fail (wet/humid) or because it is too dark for the poor high iso performance to produce 'good enough to sell' images.
The last part is what separates me from the professional - I'm not trying to pay the family invoices by photography - I'm not hoping my work is so good that a customer won't complain. That's a pressure I can do without.
It is odd, I was considering that only this morning - there was a photo opportunity I saw while driving to work, but it would mean shooting into the sun to capture the hazy atmosphere around some trees. I decided that it was probably pointless trying to capture such a shot with my zoom lenses (flare, etc.) - but maybe I should try harder It wasn't an option today anyway, no camera and due at work.Do you think that consumer-grade camera and lenses are most of the time equivalent to the pro-grade ones? Could there be a condition where the pro-grade equipment is necessary? (and the consumer-grade one not adequate to that condition?)
It is definitely the lenses that will show the most difference between pro and consumer grade kit. For example, a really cheap, third party, 18 - 200mm lens costing say £150 is going to be fairly compromised in so many areas, I went for one a level better than that, it was 4 times the price, a Nikon one, and although not measurably 4 times better, I'm happy with it. Given my finances and not having a need to spend more, why would I? As you have seen, I do alright with what I have.
Plus the next level up means spending £1,200 - £2,000 on a lens, that's almost doubling my total kit value.
Although I might accept 'somewhat' skilled and (certainly) long, but not that widely, experienced, I too don't use all the kit I have at my disposal to anywhere near its full potential either, as you say, 'too pro for me' We have several CiC members that do, but I'm not one of them
I have a few days off, starting tomorrow, when I hope to get out more with the camera and lenses and actually use them.
Please nag me into showing the results, or they'll hide on my HDD like so many others.