• Crafting with Filters - by Jon Chiang Saturday, 22th Dec @ Funan Showsuite 1:30pm to 3:30pm. Visit this thread for more information.

Pro Lens vs Rich-Hobbyist Lens


Status
Not open for further replies.

happyfrog

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2009
594
0
16
#1
Just wondering, what are the typical lens which Professional photographers would use for their day-to-day work? As compared to the Rich-hobbyist?
 

mikha

Deregistered
Jul 14, 2008
265
0
0
Earth
#2
for me, the professional photographers will buy what they need for their work. rich hobby-st will by what they want for their prestige. no matter how cheap or exp.
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#3
Too generalised. Typical lenses will depend on what they are shooting for a living.
Rich hobbyist can more or less get whatever lens they need / want ...

Ryan
 

happyfrog

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2009
594
0
16
#4
My friends and I were discussing about this.

One lens which came to discussion is the 24-70 f/2.8.

Many people dislike the fact that it's heavy. But many rich-hobbyist would buy only lenses with gold rings. I've seen many times, pros use lenses without any rings too.
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
14
0
#5
My friends and I were discussing about this.

One lens which came to discussion is the 24-70 f/2.8.

Many people dislike the fact that it's heavy. But many rich-hobbyist would buy only lenses with gold rings. I've seen many times, pros use lenses without any rings too.
Depends on the camera. If you're a pro and you're shooting with a full-frame camera, a 24-70 is almost essential in your lens line-up.
 

gazkw

Senior Member
Jan 12, 2009
1,743
1
38
East Coast
www.garygraphy.com
#6
by the term professionals, it means some one who makes his living via photography. i've seen good pros and bad pros. more than often enough, we see bad pros who like to state i've been doing this for 30 years and blah blah blah.

i have also seen hobbyist that do excellent quality images, some who just picked up a camera for a few months.

the terms pro or hobbyist doesn't mean squat, most people only care about the final result.

your question here is too generalized, you can't pull out much meaningful statistics.

edit: if you want to talk about rich hobbyist, take your eyes away from your gold rings and L lenses and move onto the leica group of users. now, that is what i call rich hobbyist. RFs are limited by the type of photography and yet an exorbitant amount are spent on them. by all means, if you can afford it, why not? who are we to say whether you deserve anything in this life. i hope i can join this group shortly :p
 

Last edited:

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,667
54
48
Pasir Ris
#8
Just wondering, what are the typical lens which Professional photographers would use for their day-to-day work? As compared to the Rich-hobbyist?
What purpose does this question serve? What is the expected answer for your own lens purchasing?
One could say that professional photographer would check costs and benefits / outcome more stringent since it affects the business results. Hobbyists tend to be more generous and may spend more than what is actually necessary. But what's wrong with that? An L lens will always look good, it's the photographer showing off that looks silly.
 

happyfrog

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2009
594
0
16
#10
I assume that the pros will make more rational decisions as compared to the rich-hobbyist. So, following their decision making patterns on lenses is in a sense more cost-efficient. Sorry, but I gotta stretch my dollar now. Pocket getting tighter.
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,901
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#11
two schools of thought when you are talking about business in photography.

one is spend the least amount to generate profit.
photographers believe in this will not spend money on gears, image packaging, customer service etc...

another one is spend the right amount to maximize your profit.
photographers believe in this will spend whatever they think is appropriate and necessary on equipment, image packaging, marketing, advertising, customer service etc...


so, some pros use only kit lens, some pros use only pro lens.
 

Anson

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,210
7
38
ansonchew.com
www.ansonchew.com
#12
Basically a lens is just to get the job done (for the desired outcome). If a third party lens vendor had come out with a 70-200F2.8 IS, I may had choose that instead of my Canon L.
 

CS TAN

Senior Member
Sep 3, 2007
3,663
0
0
Hong Kong
#13
for me, the professional photographers will buy what they need for their work. rich hobby-st will by what they want for their prestige. no matter how cheap or exp.
Good answer.

May I add, Rich collectors will collect every top of the line lenses the manufacturer produced.
 

Last edited:

surrephoto

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2009
3,436
3
38
28
Chinatown
www.surrephoto.com
#14
We are simply over-generalising... There are many reasons to use expensive (usually meaning better) lenses then kit/minimal lenses... for example...

1. Build & Reliability

Last thing you want happen to your lens would be for it to fail during a shoot. As much as this sounds like over-precaution, how many people would buy back-up lenses? Canon users know how certain non-L lenses have recurring AF motor issues and other problems.

2. Impress/Defend
This once I encountered a foreign-talent wedding photographer using Eos 10D with EF 50 f1.8 for most of his shots. He then told me that the only reason he used this setup was that it works, but how he was once "challenged" by a client's relative who showed off his 1DsIII + 35 mm f1.4 setup.

We all know that it is at least 60% the man behind the camera, but with overly minimal equipment, your clients will no doubt start itching when their cousin uses a D3X or similar. An expensive camera/lens looks like one when it's one.

3. Maximum possible image quality and large apertures (prime-lens)

Using expensive prime lenses give you the ability to challenge situations usually impossible to tackle. You could say that you don't shoot wide open but the ability to do so when needed is a blessing.

As a canon user, L lenses certainly deliver different colours and contrast which are deemed slightly superior towards non L counterparts (not sure about nikon but my encounter with it was that nikon lower end lenses much better vs canon lower end lenses... no choice since already jump into canon bandwagon).
 

Last edited:

Limsgp

New Member
Dec 16, 2005
1,128
0
0
Singapore, Bedok
#15
Lens is not everything.. the illumination and the environment matters too..

If the site is sufficiently bright or with good lighting, a kit lens might suffice.. Since it's for profit, why carry a heaver lens when a light kit lens can do the same..


Also noticed that sometimes some pros also use kit lens for their job and can deliver the results that client wants.
 

dche5390

New Member
Jun 20, 2009
134
0
0
Sydney
#16
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.
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,776
45
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#17
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.
That's an assumption that working pros know what they are doing, which is not necessarily true.....
 

rgy1993

Deregistered
Mar 28, 2007
994
0
0
Singapore
#18
Also noticed that sometimes some pros also use kit lens for their job and can deliver the results that client wants.
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...
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,942
0
36
#19
What you use doesn't define your status. Its how you use it that matters.
Rich man's lens, poor man's lens, any lens that gives good image is a good lens.
Pro photographer, amateur photographer, any photographer who gives good results is a good photographer.

It doesn't really matter what equipment we use. As long as we know what it takes to deliver to the client. For the rich hobbyist, the client is himself. If gold rings are what it takes, gold rings are what it takes.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,942
0
36
#20
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...
Either:-
1) the clients didn't demand that
2) rather put more bread on the table with that money if it's not going to help earn more $$
3) both..

4) the L lens doesn't mount on the body can be another reason.
 

Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom