May as well sell all your fancy cameras and lenses guys

gloobag

charybdis

Yeah, you're going to need the money for thousands of dollars worth of lighting gear.

gloobag

charybdis wrote: »

Yeah, you're going to need the money for thousands of dollars worth of lighting gear.

Agreed, the video is a total failure. He harps on about how you don't need fancy gear, but there he is using expensive lights and even goes out in the middle of the shoot to buy more lights. Muppet

Thirdfox

Well floodlights aren't exactly uber expensive gear... 1/100th the cost of a 70-200 f2.8 lens? And making a snoot would be that difficult either...

But as Ken Rockwell (lol yup I know I know, bear with me) says - having the fancy expensive stuff (usually) makes it easier to get the shot you want, at exactly the moment you want it.

You wanna shoot low light, high speed, macro, landscape with fine detail etc. etc.? Then you would probably find it easier to shoot with specialised gear.

Kintarō Hattori

Ah I think you guys are missing the point a little. He is merely saying that you don't need a super expensive camera to take great images. Sure there is lots of expensive lighting but at the end of the day the images and they were very good were taken on an iPhone.

It does help put an end to the arguement that you need a good camera to take good images. Yes there was expensive lighting but they weren't exactly hiding it.

charybdis

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Ah I think you guys are missing the point a little. He is merely saying that you don't need a super expensive camera to take great images. Sure there is lots of expensive lighting but at the end of the day the images and they were very good were taken on an iPhone.

It does help put an end to the arguement that you need a good camera to take good images. Yes there was expensive lighting but they weren't exactly hiding it.

I think he proves a point, but the point isn't that you can make those kind of photographs without investment, economic or temporal; it's that you can make good photographs in spite of the equipment you have (although in this case it's by having all kinds of other cool stuff).

Thirdfox wrote: »

Well floodlights aren't exactly uber expensive gear... 1/100th the cost of a 70-200 f2.8 lens? And making a snoot would be that difficult either...

But as Ken Rockwell (lol yup I know I know, bear with me) says - having the fancy expensive stuff (usually) makes it easier to get the shot you want, at exactly the moment you want it.

You wanna shoot low light, high speed, macro, landscape with fine detail etc. etc.? Then you would probably find it easier to shoot with specialised gear.

That octabox isn't something you just cobble together out of a couple of planks and some tinfoil. The floodlights aren't expensive, but modifiers like the ones in the video that you can run hot lights through aren't cheap.

smelltheglove

My take, the iphone camera is CRAP, sorry but it is, but a cheap ass wind up camera could take fab shots with that lighting gear, geez watching that makes me want more lights but no way would I be giving up a camera for a phone, no way! Imagine the shots you could take with a proper camera and that lighting equipment.

Thirdfox

In the end it teaches us that...well you could just draw a "photo" in photoshop with the right skills... no need for a camera at all to "make" photos

I like Olympus :mad:

challengemaster

Well, the iPhone camera is alright for what it is, a phone camera. Sure, you can go, take the piss, spend hours doing a photoshoot with 100% artificial light... when at the end of it, you'll have a 1600x1200 1-3mb jpeg file that will make a 6x4.. and that's about all you'll get from it..

I mean, he had to send them off to a pro retoucher to to do ANYTHING with them...

I don't think Canon/Nikon or even Olympus need to worry about Apple entering the imaging business any time soon..

magicbastarder

so a good camera does not automatically make you a good photographer, and a cheap camera can take good shots.

next.

joeKel73

challengemaster wrote: »

I don't think Canon/Nikon or even Olympus need to worry about Apple entering the imaging business any time soon..

I'd say Apple, and other mobile phone companies, have already impacted on their business. A lot of would-be point and shoot buyers I know settle for the camera on their phones.

Fionn

i'd think that you could buy a nice little compact for a fraction of the price of that phone!!
and light is the thing isn't it? control the light and you can capture just about anything! wonder how much all the lights might cost.

dont think we'll see any fashion studio selling all their gear and buying iPhones or whatever anytime soon

btw if anyone is selling any of their good fancy gear give me a call

PopeBuckfastXVI

Reminds me of the strobist introduction video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKAD7leNOVY#t=7m40s

duffarama

Deleted User wrote: »

I like Olympus :mad:

Didn't watch the video :cool:

What did they say about Olympus :mad: so I can go on a rant

Thecageyone

he pretty much says he wants to use the crappiest camera he can find, so any Oly will do, right at start of the clip.

duffarama

He better be talking about their compacts, which are pish tbf

Rainbowsend

Someday we will be making phone calls from our Nikon/Canons etc then Apple will be stuffed