mylanta
07-07-2008, 10:38 AM
Nice beginning but careful reading suggests that all you need to do is put the right camera in the user's hands and step away. It's what isn't said that would fill reams of information though.
It sounds too easy. Pick your megapixel, get a good quality lens and off you go shooting like a pro. No never happens. Point of fact digital photography is more difficult than film because there is way less margin for error. On a film camera for years labs were saving shooters on badly exposed negatives where they missed by 2 f-stops. On digital you get only one before the lab's magic is useless, and that assumes your "white balance" is correctly set, which on most cases is not true.
Beyond that there is the difference between fixed lens and slr (single lens reflex) and the quality difference is night and day in digital. Add a lens and you will know it for sure. But here is where the primary issue with amateurs comes into play because put the best camera in the hands of the average shooter and they will chop heads off, clip bodies in half or include a tree no one saw because framing is the key difference in what an amateur shots from a Pro. With an Slr you mostly see what you get and in spite of that, framing for most is ridiculous and all it takes is looking at the center and the borders to easily see what is wrong. You have a much better chance with an Slr unless you are real close, but you still need to concentrate before you "point and shoot".
When you get all that down then go to 5 meg or better as a 6 meg quality slr camera will shoot a 20X40 nicely. The quality of the elements seldom comes in an off brand lens and you have to watch seeing a good buy on a Nikon D series but with a Tamron lens vs a Nikkor lens. You can save some $ with a Asian unregistered Nikkor which doesn't have the same warranty, but the quality is so much better than the after market brand anyway, go for it. I would rather have the off brand camera body and Nikkor lens any day of the week.
As for brands, well Nikon is mine, Canon is as good, Minolta, Pentax and Olympus are all great quality...it's personal here.
It sounds too easy. Pick your megapixel, get a good quality lens and off you go shooting like a pro. No never happens. Point of fact digital photography is more difficult than film because there is way less margin for error. On a film camera for years labs were saving shooters on badly exposed negatives where they missed by 2 f-stops. On digital you get only one before the lab's magic is useless, and that assumes your "white balance" is correctly set, which on most cases is not true.
Beyond that there is the difference between fixed lens and slr (single lens reflex) and the quality difference is night and day in digital. Add a lens and you will know it for sure. But here is where the primary issue with amateurs comes into play because put the best camera in the hands of the average shooter and they will chop heads off, clip bodies in half or include a tree no one saw because framing is the key difference in what an amateur shots from a Pro. With an Slr you mostly see what you get and in spite of that, framing for most is ridiculous and all it takes is looking at the center and the borders to easily see what is wrong. You have a much better chance with an Slr unless you are real close, but you still need to concentrate before you "point and shoot".
When you get all that down then go to 5 meg or better as a 6 meg quality slr camera will shoot a 20X40 nicely. The quality of the elements seldom comes in an off brand lens and you have to watch seeing a good buy on a Nikon D series but with a Tamron lens vs a Nikkor lens. You can save some $ with a Asian unregistered Nikkor which doesn't have the same warranty, but the quality is so much better than the after market brand anyway, go for it. I would rather have the off brand camera body and Nikkor lens any day of the week.
As for brands, well Nikon is mine, Canon is as good, Minolta, Pentax and Olympus are all great quality...it's personal here.