Shoot out: Smart phone vs Canon EOS 5D Mark III

Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

==
Later...
Ron C
--

On 10/10/2014 09:02 AM, Ron C wrote:
Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

==
Later...
Ron C
--



The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the quality
of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive camera and
great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

On 10/10/2014 12:00 PM, philo wrote:
On 10/10/2014 09:02 AM, Ron C wrote:
Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

==
Later...
Ron C
--



The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the quality
of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive camera and
great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing software. ;-)

==
Later...
Ron C
--

On 2014-10-11 00:13:54 +0000, Ron C said:

On 10/10/2014 12:00 PM, philo wrote:
On 10/10/2014 09:02 AM, Ron C wrote:
Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the quality
of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive camera and
great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing software. ;-)

Yup! Just as an Armani suit isn't going to be any better than a Men's
Warehouse two-4-one sale suit.
Regardless of the tools, one needs to learn how to use them to the best effect.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 10/10/2014 9:06 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-10-11 00:13:54 +0000, Ron C said:

On 10/10/2014 12:00 PM, philo wrote:
On 10/10/2014 09:02 AM, Ron C wrote:
Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the quality
of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive camera and
great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing software. ;-)

Yup! Just as an Armani suit isn't going to be any better than a Men's
Warehouse two-4-one sale suit.
Regardless of the tools, one needs to learn how to use them to the best
effect.


Hmm, not sure where you're going with the Armani vs Men's Warehouse.
Seems the point revolves around buy vs earn respect. As for learning
your tools well, I totally agree there.

[ ...and that includes exploring Lab mode processing space. ;-) ]

==
Later...
Ron C
--

On 2014-10-11 01:23:45 +0000, Ron C said:

On 10/10/2014 9:06 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-10-11 00:13:54 +0000, Ron C said:

On 10/10/2014 12:00 PM, philo wrote:
On 10/10/2014 09:02 AM, Ron C wrote:
Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the quality
of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive camera and
great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing software. ;-)

Yup! Just as an Armani suit isn't going to be any better than a Men's
Warehouse two-4-one sale suit.
Regardless of the tools, one needs to learn how to use them to the best
effect.


Hmm, not sure where you're going with the Armani vs Men's Warehouse.
Seems the point revolves around buy vs earn respect. As for learning
your tools well, I totally agree there.

I seem to be caught in a never ending continuing education cycle.

[ ...and that includes exploring Lab mode processing space. ;-) ]

Explore, agreed. However, I have been there and discovered that I have
no particular need for LAB processes in my workflow. Obviously, given
some of the participants in this room, others have chosen a different
path.

Just because I don't use something, or don't favor its use, doesn't
mean that I don't understand the principles behind its purpose, or that
others might choose to use whatever they use.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014101018061063758-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all: ~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry
about gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry
about light." ~~

philo:
The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the
quality of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on
gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive
camera and great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Ron C:
Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing
software. ;-)

Yup! Just as an Armani suit isn't going to be any better than a
Men's Warehouse two-4-one sale suit.

Uhm, not sure if you're joking here. An expensive suit most certainly is
*better* than a Walmart suit, better quality, better fit, better looking.
THe point is that an expensive suit won't make a business man out of a
homeless person, just as Photoshop won't make a graphics expert out of
anyone. But Photoshop most certainly is *better* than many/most/all
"walmart suit" graphic editors, it's just that it's hardly the only thing
needed for the end result.

Regardless of the tools, one needs to learn how to use them to the best
effect.

Indeed. And there is no doubt that a Nikon D4s is *better* than a Canon
Ixus 145, but that doesn't mean that wielding a D4s will make your photo
magically better than using the Ixus. You always need to know how to use
the tools to reach their potential.



--
Sandman[.net]

On 2014-10-12 15:08:33 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 2014101018061063758-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all: ~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry
about gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry
about light." ~~

philo:
The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the
quality of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on
gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive
camera and great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Ron C:
Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing
software. ;-)

Yup! Just as an Armani suit isn't going to be any better than a
Men's Warehouse two-4-one sale suit.

Uhm, not sure if you're joking here.

Just a ridiculous metaphorical example.

An expensive suit most certainly is *better* than a Walmart suit,

Walmart sells suits? Who knew?

better quality, better fit, better looking.
THe point is that an expensive suit won't make a business man out of a
homeless person,

Well that is making a presumptous judgement of a homeless person's
capabilities and potential based on his/her appearance.

just as Photoshop won't make a graphics expert out of
anyone.

True, especially when they don't explore, and educate themselves to
take advantage of the new features of PS. There is more to making one's
self proficient enough to claim a degree of expertise in Photoshop,
other than saying they own it.
For me PS is a continuing education exercise.
....and it does nothing to improve taste or refine the eye when it comes
to producing impressive & pleasing images.

But Photoshop most certainly is *better* than many/most/all
"walmart suit" graphic editors, it's just that it's hardly the only thing
needed for the end result.

Yup!

Regardless of the tools, one needs to learn how to use them to the best
effect.

Indeed. And there is no doubt that a Nikon D4s is *better* than a Canon
Ixus 145, but that doesn't mean that wielding a D4s will make your photo
magically better than using the Ixus. You always need to know how to use
the tools to reach their potential.

Another ugly truth from Scandinavia which can be applied globally.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 10/12/2014 10:08 AM, Sandman wrote:
In article 2014101018061063758-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all: ~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry
about gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry
about light." ~~

philo:
The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the
quality of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on
gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive
camera and great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Ron C:
Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing
software. ;-)

Yup! Just as an Armani suit isn't going to be any better than a
Men's Warehouse two-4-one sale suit.

Uhm, not sure if you're joking here. An expensive suit most certainly is
*better* than a Walmart suit, better quality, better fit, better looking.


Yep...I have one expensive taylor made suit. I look so good in it I got
rid of most of the others. Since I rarely wear a suit I doubt if anyone
is counting...but I do get a lot of compliments when I wear it.

It was worth every cent I paid...even though it was four times the cost
of an "off the shelf" suit.


THe point is that an expensive suit won't make a business man out of a
homeless person, just as Photoshop won't make a graphics expert out of
anyone. But Photoshop most certainly is *better* than many/most/all
"walmart suit" graphic editors, it's just that it's hardly the only thing
needed for the end result.

Regardless of the tools, one needs to learn how to use them to the best
effect.

Indeed. And there is no doubt that a Nikon D4s is *better* than a Canon
Ixus 145, but that doesn't mean that wielding a D4s will make your photo
magically better than using the Ixus. You always need to know how to use
the tools to reach their potential.

Ron C wrote:
On 10/10/2014 12:00 PM, philo wrote:
On 10/10/2014 09:02 AM, Ron C wrote:
Just for the heck of it, here's an article that might make some folks
wonder why bother spending big bucks on a DSLR when a smart
phone will do.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/...amera-vs-dslr/

The end of closing line of the article kind of says it all:
~~
[ ... ] remember this photography aphorism: "Amateurs worry about
gear; professionals worry about money; masters worry about light."
~~

==
Later...
Ron C
--



The other day I was trying to come up with a term reflecting the quality
of one's photos vs the amount of money they've spent on gear.

I'm sure we all know mediocre photographers with expensive camera and
great photographers who own a $90 point and shoot.

Seems one might draw a similar parallel with photo editing software. ;-)

In fact though, I'll bet most of us know very few, if
any, really good photographers who only own a $90 P&S.
I've never met even one!

And while there may indeed be plenty of mediocre folks
with expensive equipment and software, there is little
question that for most people better tools do help them
1) get better pictures, and/or 2) learn more about
photography on their way to becoming more than just
another mediocre photographer.

Expensive tools (hardware or software) are more of a
direct indication of how dedicated a person is to
photography. In time, with experience, that will
eventually equate also to the quality of their work.

And to put it mildly, a lifetime spend with poor tools
won't likely ever result in the development of a really
good photographer. Neither does the first afternoon, or
may be the first year or even decade, with good
equipment make a great photographer.

But almost every craftsman develops a taste for fine
tools.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)