Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 103

Thread: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

  1. #81

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    If you are serious about making money out of this, I suggest you starting thinking 50mm/1.4G, 85mm/1.4D instead.

    AFS 50mm/1.4G on your D40 may yield better pics than your 50/1.8 on a D90. Food for thought...

    But please reserve more budget for good glass. Changing a body will not have that much of an impact compared to good glass.
    i see...but i find the 50mm f1.4 AFS is expensive as in i find that it's better to use the money to get a body that can autofocus with the AF lenses and yes i'm also aiming like AF 85mm f1.4D... cos overall the D90 body will give me options to print bigger if the clients want to make a big poster etc...and after that investing on good glasses..haha..

  2. #82
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Bedok
    Posts
    3,268

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    #1, If you shoot a wedding with entry level camera, and his friends also use a entry level camera.
    if one person work is better, what does it imply?


    #2, If you shoot a wedding with entry level camera, and his friends use a pro grade camera.
    if your works is better, what does it imply?
    if his work is better, what does it imply?


    #3, If you shoot a wedding with pro grade camera, and his friends use a entry level camera.
    if your works is better, what does it imply?
    if his work is better, what does it imply?


    Think, you will find the answer you are looking for.


    like what Mod Ortega always says, "only the pictures matter", and you suppose to make it happen.
    My conclusions are...

    1. the question to 2A is the same as 3B, and the answer to 2B is the same as 3A, so these are redundant.

    2. there is no question asking what if both use pro grade camera... thus I refuse to answer any further question

  3. #83
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    My conclusions are...

    1. the question to 2A is the same as 3B, and the answer to 2B is the same as 3A, so these are redundant.

    2. there is no question asking what if both use pro grade camera... thus I refuse to answer any further question
    you are the first one response to my questions,
    Ok, seem most people don't want to spend time do some thinking, allow me to share my view here.

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    #1, If you shoot a wedding with entry level camera, and his friends also use a entry level camera.
    if one person work is better, what does it imply?
    when equipment is the same, photographer matters.


    #2, If you shoot a wedding with entry level camera, and his friends use a pro grade camera.
    if your works is better, what does it imply? you are better a photographer
    if his work is better, what does it imply? straight answer, you are not ready yet


    #3, If you shoot a wedding with pro grade camera, and his friends use a entry level camera.
    if your works is better, what does it imply? you are paid to do for what you are suppose to
    if his work is better, what does it imply? you are a fake photographer


    Think, you will find the answer you are looking for.


    like what Mod Ortega always says, "only the pictures matter", and you suppose to make it happen.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  4. #84
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lim View Post
    Of Cos Expensive Camera is needed for Portrait Photography. The more expensive the better! Not forgetting the latest, the most number of Megapixels too! The newer and the more megapixels the better . Thats why i feel getting the latest H3dII or maybe even the PhaseOne 645 DF is a MUST for everyone. Because with the Latest Camera and Highest Megapixel count, Every single photo will be a sure winner.

    Isn't that what alot of photographers ask their clients to believe in these day? And also Isnt that what customers are buying these days too because we the photographers tell them that?

    Damn, i should have gone into selling cameras instead.
    thanks for sharing a more "balanced" view.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  5. #85
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by focusHeart View Post
    haha...one reason why i want the D90 is the use of AF lens which is cheaper than the AFS version. I believe i can save alot. Maybe next time if i have lots of cash i might get AFS lenses...but seriously i've not seen a person using Fujifilm S5pro on the streets..
    Neither have I. I have only seen many pros using them at weddings not on the streets.

  6. #86
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by focusHeart View Post
    i see...but i find the 50mm f1.4 AFS is expensive as in i find that it's better to use the money to get a body that can autofocus with the AF lenses and yes i'm also aiming like AF 85mm f1.4D... cos overall the D90 body will give me options to print bigger if the clients want to make a big poster etc...and after that investing on good glasses..haha..
    D90 can work well for you. But if you are seriously thinking of this as a paying job, junk the 50/1.8 and replace it with at least the 50/1.4 AFD or AFS. Good glass is very important, a lot more than the camera body. But a lot depends on what kind of portrait photography you will be doing. If you are doing posed portraits, MF will work just fine.

  7. #87

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    D90 can work well for you. But if you are seriously thinking of this as a paying job, junk the 50/1.8 and replace it with at least the 50/1.4 AFD or AFS. Good glass is very important, a lot more than the camera body. But a lot depends on what kind of portrait photography you will be doing. If you are doing posed portraits, MF will work just fine.
    i see...but i hate manual focusing cos need to keep turning the focus ring, not sure can compose..then also need to step back and forth...haha...

  8. #88

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    Weddings nowadays are mostly held indoors, with more and more mood lighting. Meaning it is dark. A kit lens would be a little crippled here, being a lens that is slower. That is why many wedding photographers are mostly equipped with multiple bodies with large aperture prime lenses if they intend to use ambient light. For flash photography, kit lens is fine.



    The AF motor thing is not as big a deal as you think. I wonder how you have out-grown a D40.

    This is shot with a D40x and a 50mm/1.8. Cheapo set up.

    outgrown as in there are cameras where there are buttons outside for me to change specific things and i feel lazy to go to the menu to change. It's like using e-mail instead of snail mail...haha... The AF motor as for me is a big deal cos my subject feels irritated to hold the pose and expression where i spend time turning the focus ring...

    Btw your shot is very nice...
    Last edited by focusHeart; 19th April 2010 at 03:49 PM.

  9. #89

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Forget about simik DSLR if you want people to see you 'UP PRO' portrait photographer. Dunno wat not H3D also CMI.

    Use this instead: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=682630 and attach a digital back to it.

    If your subjects can't keep still for at least 3 minutes while you focus, they don't deserve you! :-)
    Last edited by Dream Merchant; 19th April 2010 at 04:10 PM.

  10. #90
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,210

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    If your subjects can't keep still for at least 3 minutes while you focus, they don't deserve you! :-)
    Hahaha...

  11. #91

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Just kidding.

    Use whatever feels comfortable for you.

    While it's fashionable to say 'it's the man behind the bla bla bla', working well with human subjects encompass far more than a capable camera and good lens. That's only 5-10% of what's actually required so might as well settle that small percentage and don't let the equipment 'issues' bother you.

    A H3D is indeed a scary beast! It's amazing what the imacon based sensor and Fujinon lenses can do! BBB!
    Last edited by Dream Merchant; 19th April 2010 at 04:15 PM.

  12. #92

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    thanks for sharing a more "balanced" view.
    lol. While i do agree equiptment plays a part. I also feel that if the photographer doesnt know what equipment or even lenses to use for what ever purpose, it is useless to be asking what equipment to use and better still ask what settings to apply for what shots. This is amazingly common in CS. But it is a problem we can't solve.

    Next is, The reason for my earlier post is. When person A buys a 1Ds mkIII but shoots crap. He can still churn up sth in photoshop that looks like an abstract art piece and still sell it to his customers. But the problem they don't see is. As the time goes on, and they improve their photography skills, they basically just killed themselves. Because the customers after going through a million other photographers selling the same thing are now disillusioned that any photographer can produce the same result if its by means of a latest camera and photoshop. Every Visual Graphic is now an amazing photograph! Please take note i mentioned Visual Graphic and not Photograph.

    So in simple words. A Major part of the consumer market is changing to not be able to tell the difference between a very strong technically good photograph VS a blah image these days. To me thats just shooting yourself in the foot cos of our own short foresights.


    So Back to topic, "Expensive camera needed for Portrait Photography?"

    My answer: YES OF COS! the more expensive the better so i can tell my clients that i can leave my camera on the table at the job and stay at home and still produce amazing images.
    Last edited by Chris Lim; 19th April 2010 at 05:06 PM.

  13. #93
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lim View Post
    lol. While i do agree equiptment plays a part. I also feel that if the photographer doesnt know what equipment or even lenses to use for what ever purpose, it is useless to be asking what equipment to use and better still ask what settings to apply for what shots. This is amazingly common in CS. But it is a problem we can't solve.

    Next is, The reason for my earlier post is. When person A buys a 1Ds mkIII but shoots crap. He can still churn up sth in photoshop that looks like an abstract art piece and still sell it to his customers. But the problem they don't see is. As the time goes on, and they improve their photography skills, they basically just killed themselves. Because the customers after going through a million other photographers selling the same thing are now disillusioned that any photographer can produce the same result if its by means of a latest camera and photoshop. Every Visual Graphic is now an amazing photograph! Please take note i mentioned Visual Graphic and not Photograph.

    So in simple words. A Major part of the consumer market is changing to not be able to tell the difference between a very strong technically good photograph VS a blah image these days. To me thats just shooting yourself in the foot cos of our own short foresights.


    So Back to topic, "Expensive camera needed for Portrait Photography?"

    My answer: YES OF COS! the more expensive the better so i can tell my clients that i can leave my camera on the table at the job and stay at home and still produce amazing images.
    till today, I still can remember one local photographer put his camera in his website, "my camera si bei tok gong, my lens si bei sharp, blar blar blar........" everybody have to see his camera first before see his works,

    when you say you want to sell camera, I tot you were him..... lol

    btw, I just try to google, but che bo leh, don't know where is he now.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  14. #94

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    After 90+ posts down the thread, I am sure he wants a D90 and had already decided even before he asked.

    So I say go for it.

    Revisit this thread after a few months or even a year later and see if the decision is still sound.
    WTB Manfrotto RC4 L Bracket

  15. #95

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    Forget about simik DSLR if you want people to see you 'UP PRO' portrait photographer. Dunno wat not H3D also CMI.

    Use this instead: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=682630 and attach a digital back to it.

    If your subjects can't keep still for at least 3 minutes while you focus, they don't deserve you! :-)
    haha...i prefer the simik DSLR...i dun need to be looked that pro..haha...

    i can't say they don't deserve me...haha..since i'm the one asking for favour. Imagine for street photography or other kinds of portrait shoot u keep smiling and the photographer keep taking time to focus...even when he click the shutter the focus could be wrong...haha...
    Last edited by focusHeart; 19th April 2010 at 05:48 PM.

  16. #96

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    till today, I still can remember one local photographer put his camera in his website, "my camera si bei tok gong, my lens si bei sharp, blar blar blar........" everybody have to see his camera first before see his works,

    when you say you want to sell camera, I tot you were him..... lol

    btw, I just try to google, but che bo leh, don't know where is he now.
    Lol. what to do. Hang cheng pai. Must find alternative Liao. Lol

  17. #97

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    Just kidding.

    Use whatever feels comfortable for you.

    While it's fashionable to say 'it's the man behind the bla bla bla', working well with human subjects encompass far more than a capable camera and good lens. That's only 5-10% of what's actually required so might as well settle that small percentage and don't let the equipment 'issues' bother you.

    A H3D is indeed a scary beast! It's amazing what the imacon based sensor and Fujinon lenses can do! BBB!
    haha...when i saw ur link i thought what is that thing...looks like some old camera used in Charlie Chaplin time...haha....

  18. #98

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by sjackal View Post
    After 90+ posts down the thread, I am sure he wants a D90 and had already decided even before he asked.

    So I say go for it.

    Revisit this thread after a few months or even a year later and see if the decision is still sound.
    haha....i think u posted on the wrong thread; that one at Nikon thread....haha..still deciding but leaning towards D90
    Last edited by focusHeart; 19th April 2010 at 05:57 PM.

  19. #99
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Sicily, Mediterranean Sea
    Posts
    1,805

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by focusHeart View Post
    haha...one reason why i want the D90 is the use of AF lens which is cheaper than the AFS version. I believe i can save alot. Maybe next time if i have lots of cash i might get AFS lenses...but seriously i've not seen a person using Fujifilm S5pro on the streets..
    well the S5pro F1B mode reproduces really nice skintones. ask any wedding photographer on that hehe. plus it uses Nikon lenses. Why not go for a D50 or a D80 because i think D90 is kinda exp still right? or a D200/ S5pro (both are the same build except diff sensor. haha

  20. #100
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,210

    Default Re: Expensive cameras needed for portrait photography?

    Quote Originally Posted by wheresmycheese View Post
    well the S5pro F1B mode reproduces really nice skintones. ask any wedding photographer on that hehe.

    I agree that S5Pro give one of most flattering skin tones straight out of camera for portraiture shots.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 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
  •