Why are professional photographers so afraid to admit it's mostly their equipment

lol is a good example thank you honestly and I thought the same question
but the question remains the same and remains asked.? !!!!!
Dafont 123Movies FileHippo

 

That's a terrible analogy. Top WoW arena players can use whatever and beat a novice with expensive gear. Same goes for every game.

Music, you give a £100 guitar to Joe Bonamassa and he'll play it better than 100% of this forum with a £10,000 guitar.

Talent is the most important thing, albeit in photography, you simply need the right lens to take a shot, sometimes. You won't be taking good macro shots without a macro lens, for instance.

 

you're kidding right? why was slick3's analogy terrible? you still need the right tool for the job regardless?

a macro lens doesn't teach you how to approach your subject without disturbing it, nor does it train you to hold your camera and lens steadily and control your breathing nailing focus dealing with literally 2-3mm depth of field with a live, skittish insect

expensive gear does not teach you how to recognise good light and compose a scene

there are budget, entry level camera body and lenses that can take stunning landscapes, just like your budget guitar and gaming gear analogy, no?

 

I never said anything about a macro lens teaching you about shooting macro or give you the skill. I even said talent is the most important. But sometimes you need the gear.

You won't get a good pin sharp 1:1 macro without a macro lens, so yeah, you need it and no photographer will be able to take such a photo without an appropriate lens. Fact.

Landscapes, you can shoot those with most phones nowadays and you'll get great results, unless you're blowing them out to A3 or larger.

I was never talking about landscape photography, two completely different techniques and one requires gear (macro), fact.

Also, Slick was on about "why are professional musicians so afraid to admit it's mainly their instruments"?

That is so wrong, like I said, a great musician will play better on a cheap instrument than the majority of the world can do on super expensive gear. How am I wrong?

 

i think you need to re-read what slick3 was trying to say, he literally said saying a good photographer is because of gear is like saying a good musician is because of instrument as opposed to hard work and talent

btw if you think you have to use a dedicated macro lens to get pin sharp 1:1 macro you need to look up who thomas shahan is and the gear he uses and while you're at it reverse macro

and it still doesn't change the fact that you need the right gear to do the job, but somehow when it comes to photography it's "all about the gear" and never about the photographer's time and dedication learning the craft

are you asking ricciardo or hamilton to race in f1 with a toyota corolla?

 

I don't see that in his post at all.

And you don't have to suggest I read up on reverse macro, I've been familiar with it for years but I've never done it because I do have a macro lens. And even then, what I said stands. Sometimes in photography you simply need gear. Be it a 1:1 macro lens, be it a long telephoto for certain shots etc. To generalise what I said earlier, you need the right gear to get a solid macro shot, you won't be achieving it on a kit lens or a 50mm prime.

 

but that's exactly what I've been saying all along in all my posts, that you need the right tool for the job, never said otherwise, the point I've been trying to make is that the gear still don't make you a good photographer, you still need to learn how to use those tools properly

and again, look up Thomas Shahan, his macro work is probably the best I've ever seen, it's nothing short of stunning, yet he shoots with (if I remember correctly) an old crop pentax and reverse mounts some vintage manual focus 50mm lens that costs like 100 bux or something

http://thomasshahan.com/#photos

edit: his kit:
http://thomasshahan.com/#about

 

100% agreed, I wasn't really replying to your posts though mate, only to Slick's, that's all.

The way I see it, for landscapes, for example, you really can get amazing shots with pretty much any gear, if you have the knowledge, if you nail the light, the framing, you're pretty much there. Hell, take a solid smartphone, shoot in manual, low ISO and RAW and you will get a great result, you'll struggle a bit when you print them on something large though, obviously, because the phone sensors are still far from that of a DSLR. But if you just want something A4, even smartphones will get you there.

I shoot a lot of macro, trust me I know how hard it is to hold the camera steady with that shallow DoF and it takes practise, I also know not to go out to shoot macro that I usually shoot, when it's even remotely windy. I shoot insects that usually sit on blades of grass or leaves and yeah, you know how much even the slightest of breezes can make shooting macro almost impossible.

I've never come across Shahan's work but there's so many talented macro photographers out there, maybe that's why.

So, let me sum up what I was trying to put across. I am fully behind the idea that talent is the most important. When I say talent, I mean talent, experience, technique, everything that goes with that. But sometimes, you can't achieve the target when you don't have the gear. It can be very specific.

Hope that explains what I meant. I like your work, from what I've seen on here as well, well done.

 

now there are a lot of long comments here, so i will add a little bit to this discussion.

You cannot win a race with the fastest car and a crap driver.

Nor can you win a race with a crap car and the worlds best driver.

It is a balance of the two, whether anyone admits it or not.