Pro Body vs Pro Lens

[Deadpoet]

This is the BIGGEST crock I ever heard!

I really wonder if the cameras of the 50s are as technologically as advanced as even the simple Ixus. I don't think so. And I don't think the photographers ever dreamt of burst mode, bracketing, etc.
Yet, most riveting images are from the 50s, 60s. Few from the 2000s. Even with the most high tech cameras.

The reason that images from the 50's and 60's appeared most riveting is simple, those we see are the selected few, the best and those we choose to preserve. Only the best are being archieved, and survive the test of time. The no so good ones all literally faded into history. As to images from the recent years, there are so many out there, the so so and the down right bad ones are all available for us to admire and discard.

I know of a photography teacher who can get 36 good, quallity photos out of 36 shots using film. I know of digital buffs who using the Drat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat method getting 1 good shot from 40 shots.

You are comparing apples to oranges, which seems like a favourite past time on the forum. One is a photography teacher, a pro, and the other a digital buff, an amateur. Give your photography teacher a pro DSLR setup, and it will be 36 out of 36. On the other hand, the amateur will still get 1 good one out of many he shot.

My view is that pro bodies are pro because they allow a lesser photographer to do things easier, which to a better photographer is a no brainer. If you feel that you don't have the skill to take a good shot with a press of the shutter, perfect exposure everytime, then should work towards a pro body 1st. if you have the skill to take the best photos at the level of 1 shot 1 kill, then you would start looking into lens.

I really don;t know what to say about this one. Bad photographer, nomatter what you give them, the images created will not be consistence, maybe an occasional good one. No pro body will help.

 

[student]

My view is that pro bodies are pro because they allow a lesser photographer to do things easier, which to a better photographer is a no brainer.

????

Let me tell you what Sebastio Salgado used for his work on the Kuwaiti oli fire.

A Leica SLR. Ask a lesser photographer to use this camera and see what happen!

The reason why Salgado used a Leica is because the camera is reliable. Not because it allowed him to take photographs easier. If one know nuts about photogaphy, he better do not touch a Leica! But a Leica will survive where other all-singing all-dancing cameras will kaput!

The main reason for using a pro camera is RELIABILITY. They are made to tougher specifications.

 

[buddy]

i vote for a simple manual nikon fm2 with a equally priced nikkor 35mm lens

 

[unseen]

Hmmm basically I'm saying that I feel that body is unimportant. I'm also saying that with experience he can judge enough to get 1 shot 1 kill with a manual camera, it's a total given with a digital camera. Pro bodies has better ease of use, with more features, better DR, etc. if you're a beginner, you'll get crap anyway. if you're pro, you most prob won't need those feature to help you take THE photo.

Not to start brand war, but of all the photography equipment, my teacher did emphasize mostly about optics. He'll only touch nikon optics because he trusts in them. He said they were the most important in getting a great image.

I won't doubt for a moment about reliability of pro cameras, but i doubt most of the photographers would need it.

Back to the original thread starter's question, given only the choice to choose 1,
I'd go for Choice 2: Professional lens + prosumer grade body

if your skill is there, the body is just a body. The image comes foremost through the lens.
If for a second you have the wonderful Canon 18-55mm kit lens, and a 1DSmk2, compared to a 350D with a 17-40L...

i'm not picking on any brand once again.

 

[Watcher]

8fps will give you an extra shot by the time a 3 fps fires off its second shot. If you need to capture the moment, can be significant.

And miss the most important shot since the user expect that the 8fps covers everything. I don't deny that 8fps is great to have but it gives rubbish if you don't have the skill to use it. That is the issue. The expectation that a pro body can replace skill.

Of course, at theend of the day, it's the photographer behind the cmera that is most important. However, in this discussion, I sure hope you are making the photographer a constant, not a variable. And I will again say, better camera with larger sensor wins. This is my personal experience and that's what is important. Other ppl's review is other pll's opinion.

In all cases? Hmmm, a SLR/n wins over a E-1 in all situations?

Am I glad you quoted student's comment. In the digital world, the film has been replaced by the sensor. Since the sensor is permanently attached to the camera, we have to talk about camera, don't we? And again, my experience, a 6 MP MF sensor beats the 16 MP sensor of a 1DsMk2 hands down.

SLR/n = 14MP, 24x36mm (approximately). E-1 5MP 18x13.5 sensor. Again, in all cases?

Ironic, as you also said, you left off my medical example? Now that we are using the computer to help us do lots of previously manual calculation, is loosing the ability to use an abacus a good thing or not?

Medical example? Putting it in is fine. When we are in the 23rd century. Now using computer is good. But not when you loose the knowledge on how to do the standard add, subtract, multiply and divide. Go and tell the Minister of Education to drop basic maths and to at least memorize the multiplication tables till say 10x10, since a calculator can do these operations faster. BTW, abacus is making a come back. Didn't you see those special classes using abacuses to teach children how to count and calculate faster? Ironic, given your comments.

Totally agree with you, good lens bad camera or good camera bad lens, will both yield disasterous result. There is no receipes to follow, but from the collective experience of all photographers, then we make our decision. However, catagorically saying that a high end comsumer DSLR is better than a pro level DSLR, is just like following a reciepe blindly. It depends on the type of pictures you like to shoot.

Back to the OP question, Pro Body or Pro Lens, I say it depends!

That is the expectation that using a Pro body will cover a magnitude of the lack of skill.

 

[hazmee]

I dont mind shooting an EFS lens on the 20D anytime rather than shooting 300D with the L-lenses(my current set-up). After I have been shooting extensively in events, I realised I need the metal body for all the bumps(I can be quite clumsy at times) and the instant start-up for those dramatic yet unpredicatable shots.

I am not rich to buy those luxurious gear but I have always believed in getting the best results that I could in whatever set-up I am using. If have to get those 'desired' equipment to achieve what I need and make my life easier, then I will get them.

For my kind of work I will stick to the choice no 1. Cheers to all.

 

[Pro Image]

Somehow at the end of the day, with all this bickering about pro lenses and pro bodies is it going to make your skills any better?

From what I have read thru, there is no conclusion. Infact it will confuse some newbies along the way.

Comparision will never never ever end. NEVER.

Different people have different expectation. Live with it.

Go out and shoot with your Pro Lenses and Pro Bodies. Let the audience be the judge on which is better. What do you all guys think?

 

[Deadpoet]

Somehow at the end of the day, with all this bickering about pro lenses and pro bodies is it going to make your skills any better?

From what I have read thru, there is no conclusion. Infact it will confuse some newbies along the way.

Comparision will never never ever end. NEVER.

Different people have different expectation. Live with it.

Go out and shoot with your Pro Lenses and Pro Bodies. Let the audience be the judge on which is better. What do you all guys think?

you are right. this discussion is getting nowhere when you have ppl changing the boundries of the discussion at their whims, alwsy trying to compare an apple to an orange.

I am going out to shoot some picture.

 

[student]

Go out and shoot with your Pro Lenses and Pro Bodies. Let the audience be the judge on which is better. What do you all guys think?

I have just exposed

1 12 sheets of HP5 (Horribly old fashion camera! No meter at all. No auto-advanced. No- autofocus! Etc Etc)
2 Two rolls of TriX 135 on my SLR ( a little better - got metering! But that is all!)
3 191 images on my DSLR (non-pro, but auto everything!)

Unfortunately I dare not show my images, because by CS standards, they are crap. So pro lenses or non pro lenses, probodies or nonpro bodies - I am well.........:embrass:

So it is safer for me to "just talk!"!

 

[Pro Image]

you are right. this discussion is getting nowhere when you have ppl changing the boundries of the discussion at their whims, alwsy trying to compare an apple to an orange.

I am going out to shoot some picture.

Haha....good one bro!

Hope to see some photos from you soon!

 

[Pro Image]

I have just exposed

1 12 sheets of HP5 (Horribly old fashion camera! No meter at all. No auto-advanced. No- autofocus! Etc Etc)
2 Two rolls of TriX 135 on my SLR ( a little better - got metering! But that is all!)
3 191 images on my DSLR (non-pro, but auto everything!)

Unfortunately I dare not show my images, because by CS standards, they are crap. So pro lenses or non pro lenses, probodies or nonpro bodies - I am well.........:embrass:

So it is safer for me to "just talk!"!

Pak Cik Chong! Show lar. Your works should be worth showing. Your chair photos are quite interesting.

Haha!

 

[student]

. Your chair photos are quite interesting.Haha!

Actually you are right! I have been taking pictures of chairs! And with lousy cameras and lenses! And because my equipment are so koyak!, my images are all out of focus!

OK, I wil try to remember how to post photos again! Then you see images made by koyak (not KODAK!) camera and lens!:bsmilie:

 

[CYRN]

now I'm in a real situation of choosing between 24-105L and 5D or 1dm2n :bsmilie: :sweat:

no doubt that 5D with the 24-105 is excellent combi.:heart:

 

[Deadpoet]

now I'm in a real situation of choosing between 24-105L and 5D or 1dm2n :bsmilie: :sweat:

no doubt that 5D with the 24-105 is excellent combi.:heart:

Choice is very simple, it depends!

Depending on what you like to shoot, full frame or 1.3 crop, 3 fps or 8 fps, consumer vs pro body, each has their own merit.

No situation at all.

 

[CYRN]

Choice is very simple, it depends!

Depending on what you like to shoot, full frame or 1.3 crop, 3 fps or 8 fps, consumer vs pro body, each has their own merit.

No situation at all.

ummm.... I ment bewteen getting the lens or body first. ;p

The 2 body, I base on my budget cuz both fits my criteria.

 

[Deadpoet]

ummm.... I ment bewteen getting the lens or body first. ;p

The 2 body, I base on my budget cuz both fits my criteria.

What are you shooting with now, body and lens?

 

[espn]

ummm.... I ment bewteen getting the lens or body first. ;p

The 2 body, I base on my budget cuz both fits my criteria.

Remember FF = larger pixel = more processing