Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 61

Thread: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

  1. #21

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by dche5390 View Post
    Give a pro any camera and any lens combination (even a P&S), and they will produce results because they understand the concepts of lighting, framing, composition and PP. The tools are only as good as the person using them. Have rubbish skills, you get rubbish photos. It is simple as that. No amount of expensive gear will cover for a lack of knowledge, understanding and experience.
    Another counter example is.. "I need the shallow DoF which a PnS cannot give me" Then what?

  2. #22

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    Another counter example is.. "I need the shallow DoF which a PnS cannot give me" Then what?
    can be done, just harder!!!!!

    can always buy slr + 50mm lens.

    cheaper than most modern p&s

  3. #23

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    can be done, just harder!!!!!

    can always buy slr + 50mm lens.

    cheaper than most modern p&s
    Yeah.. give me a scale model so I can shoot from a closer distance, yeah?

  4. #24

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by dche5390 View Post
    Give a pro any camera and any lens combination (even a P&S), and they will produce results because they understand the concepts of lighting, framing, composition and PP. The tools are only as good as the person using them. Have rubbish skills, you get rubbish photos. It is simple as that. No amount of expensive gear will cover for a lack of knowledge, understanding and experience.
    A pro who realizes the limitations of certain equipment would not even consider using what you call "any camera and any lens combination".

  5. #25

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    Yeah.. give me a scale model so I can shoot from a closer distance, yeah?


    anyways.. people got money, why stop them from buying what they want to buy..

    might as well say rich people who cannot appreciate an expensive tv should not buy it. rich people who do not appreciate expensive watch should not buy it. rich people who do not appreciate good food should not buy it.

    i think the issue isn't with people having it. it's having it and thinking that they are very pr0 by nature of their equipment.. and then defending themselves when told that the pictures are not up to par.

  6. #26

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post


    anyways.. people got money, why stop them from buying what they want to buy..

    might as well say rich people who cannot appreciate an expensive tv should not buy it. rich people who do not appreciate expensive watch should not buy it. rich people who do not appreciate good food should not buy it.

    i think the issue isn't with people having it. it's having it and thinking that they are very pr0 by nature of their equipment.. and then defending themselves when told that the pictures are not up to par.
    ....and here people without that kind of spending power like us just have to drool at their equipment and think we can shoot better than them.

  7. #27
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by rgy1993 View Post
    you mean pro as in actual proffesionals who use photography to put bread on the table..

    or pro as in "hi i'm at university, i have a c00l new nikon d60, i have plenty of freetime so please visit my blogsite and hire me i very cheap wan!"


    coz i dont know very many of the first of the two who actually use kit lenses for their real jobs.. haha
    that being said though, nothing wrong with using one, just that why would you an 18-55 when, if you're a real proffesional, you should be able to get your hands on a 24-70 L or something...
    there are many photographers who shoot weddings for living don't believe in using pro lenses or pro gears, usually are those who charge very cheap, and shooting 10 to 15 or even more weddings in a month.

    their motto: cheap is good.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  8. #28
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    there are many photographers who shoot weddings for living don't believe in using pro lenses or pro gears, usually are those who charge very cheap, and shooting 10 to 15 or even more weddings in a month.

    their motto: cheap is good.
    Donc't pray pray..... 10 to 15 weddings at $400 a piece = $6000. Enough to get 2/3 holy trinity from either Canon or Nikon liao......

  9. #29

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Kit View Post
    Donc't pray pray..... 10 to 15 weddings at $400 a piece = $6000. Enough to get 2/3 holy trinity from either Canon or Nikon liao......
    Then no bread for the family?

  10. #30

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    ....and here people without that kind of spending power like us just have to drool at their equipment and think we can shoot better than them.
    Remind me of a video I saw where this rich guy crash his Ferrari Enzo to a wall in a race track.

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    4,195

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    I think it is for the professional image, even if not for the creative options. For example, when shooting passport photo in Singapore. You would go to a studio which have a FF camera with a prime lens mounted on a tripod. In India, the tiny studio will ask you to sit down, straighten up, smile. Then he whip out his PnS, half bend his knees and "click". Done. I am laughing to myself, WTF!

    Especially in this digtal edge when almost every other guy have a 5D/D700/A900, it is important to at least be seen with something of pro calibre. I have friends who swear and curse at their reception photographer when the photo is not well taken. One of the things mentioned is the gear aren't even up to par. And one of the items on the checklist now is to check what camera and lenses the photographer will be using.

    I guess if you are a pro. It makes sense to invest in a pro calibre system. Better tools open up doors for more things.

    To answer TS: I think Pro want convenience and fast...so the very pratical wide aperture zooms, AF , IS/VR/OS/VC lenses are desirable. Rich hobbyist....maybe the entire collection of Carl Zeiss and the Leica MF lenses. I am not rich but am impressed with the built and quality of these lenses so have started on a couple of affordable ones. Afterall a metal lens without electronics will outlast any plastic AF lenses.
    Last edited by ManWearPants; 19th October 2009 at 07:13 PM.

  12. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Central Singapore
    Posts
    577

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Interesting thread. Let's say a person is on a tight budget and like to do lots of portrait photography. What is the must-get lens to get the job done?

    I've heard many who says a prime lens 50mm/1.8 is enough for the job but looking at the Nikkor Lenses - the price difference between a 1.8 and a 1.4 is not that scary. Would a 1.4 be a better bet in terms of versatility and usefulness? Don't mean to hijack this thread but just curious. Thanks everybody.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    To me, thats only Pratical Photographer & Non-Pratical/Ignorance Photographers.

    A pratical photographer, pro or hobbyist, will pick the correct/cost effective equipment he needs to capture what he wants and produce good result with them.

    A non-pratical/ignorance photographer will buy the most expensive lens money can buy and hope to achieve good result with it.

    My 2 cents
    Playing with M43.

  14. #34

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    oh, no

    going to be another long thread

    one week of inactivity (PEACE) here: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=564801

    and now it's going to be this

    shud be kopitiam

  15. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Serangoon
    Posts
    255

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    I know a professional race car driver that drives a kancil in his races (to put bread on the table).

    Do you think he has any bread on the table? How about meat?

  16. #36
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by lsisaxon View Post
    Then no bread for the family?
    There's always the used market. Most of them are as good as new anyway.....

  17. #37
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Kit View Post
    Donc't pray pray..... 10 to 15 weddings at $400 a piece = $6000. Enough to get 2/3 holy trinity from either Canon or Nikon liao......
    their business model is minimization..

    they don't spend on top end gear,
    they don't shoot RAW,
    they don't process the images, just chose 300 photo, print, slot into album, deliver,
    they don't meet customers,
    they don't need to advertise,

    their customers want something cheap
    their customers want something same as their friends/cousin/silings
    so their customers each of them will get similar poses/set up
    since their customers are referred by somebody and they will recommend him to others too

    that's how they able to shoot so many weddings and charge so cheap, cos keeping the overhead cost low, minimise workload, and still able to get consistent assignments.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  18. #38
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by louismuhammad View Post
    I know a professional race car driver that drives a kancil in his races (to put bread on the table).

    Do you think he has any bread on the table? How about meat?
    If he drives in the kancil class, why not?

  19. #39
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    their business model is minimization..

    they don't spend on top end gear,
    they don't shoot RAW,
    they don't process the images, just chose 300 photo, print, slot into album, deliver,
    they don't meet customers,
    they don't need to advertise,

    their customers want something cheap
    their customers want something same as their friends/cousin/silings
    so their customers each of them will get similar poses/set up
    since their customers are referred by somebody and they will recommend him to others too

    that's how they able to shoot so many weddings and charge so cheap, cos keeping the overhead cost low, minimise workload, and still able to get consistent assignments.
    Well, personally I don't find myself wanting(its not even necessary) to compete with these people(though I specialise in something else, not weddings). These people have their own market to serve. They are responding to a demand really.

    Car analogy again...... don't expect to see a Kancil in the GT2 class.

  20. #40

    Default Re: Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens

    depends on the type of photographer.. but if you're an average pro you'd expect to have these.

    24-70 f/2.8, 16-35 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 IS

    Of course there are variations like 70-200 f/4 IS, 24-105 f/4, 17-40 f/4, all those being lower priced variants.

    This is the basic build of lenses a travel photographer would carry, along with extenders etc.


    Then food photographers will buy macro lenses such as 100mm or 180mm, and sports photojournalists will buy the expensive primes such as 400mm or 600mm.

    Portrait photographers will buy 85mm f/1.8 or f/1.2, and the list goes on for different types of photographers.

    Rich hobbyists will buy anything legendary or with a red ring, or gold ring. maybe Leica/Voigtlander/Zeiss lenses as well.


    Rich hobbyists look for form and function, pros look for build quality and performance and how the lens will help their shooting

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •