I don't get it when I see shooters spending the biggest part of their equipment budgets on bodies and glass at the exclusion of lighting and grip and other gear that is, to my way of thinking, "must have."Certainly, a good camera body and superior glass is important but I know some photographers who are shooting with a Canon 10D or a first-generation "Rebel" with moderately-priced glass and some of these guys put a lot of 1Ds shooters with the latest "L" glass to shame. There's a lot of reasons for this, and while skill and experience ranks high amongst them, there's more to it than that.
I was on the beach one time, at mid-day, and watched a shooter with a 1Ds MK II coupled to an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens shooting a pretty, bikini-clad, model in one of Canon's auto modes. Why? The shooter doesn't own a light meter. That's about $8,500 to $9,000 worth of body and glass owned by someone who didn't think it important to spend a few hundred bucks on a light meter. Instead, he was relying on the camera's auto-exposure design to deliver the best possible images in a situation where highlights and shadows were working overtime against him and his camera's auto-metering system. This guy also wasn't using anything to modify or control the light. I struck up a conversation with him and learned he didn't own any lighting or light modifying gear; he didn't even own a Speedlite flash or a reflector. I asked him why and he told me he couldn't afford to spend anything more on his pretty girl shooting hobby.
Ooookay.
I understand, when it comes to camera gear, bragging rights seem to be important to a lot of shooters but bragging rights never snapped a great image.Do yourself a favor: If you're about to spend some serious money on camera gear, try to get the most bang for your buck. And that bang isn't limited to the camera itself or the glass you're going to mount to it. If you're serious about this thing we do, invest in a light meter and learn to use it. If you hope to consistently capture beautiful images of beautiful women, realize that "perfect light" is rarely at hand without some modification of "available light." Invest in some lighting gear! The rules of diminishing returns applies to cameras and lenses. If that means your budget doesn't allow for the "best" camera or glass without sacrificing other important equipment, resist the urge to go that way. Think harder about what will deliver the "best" images, in terms of your overall equipment arsenal, regardless of whether some of the gear you might end up using doesn't qualify as, technologically, the "best" available.
The pretty girl posted along with this minor diatribe is Paris. I shot her in my studio about a year ago. At 18, she wasn't very experienced but she knew, instinctively, how to play to the camera. MUA was Terese Heddon. Canon 20D w/28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 Canon zoom. That's only about two-grand worth of camera and glass in my hands working in concert with about that much again in lighting and grip. (About half the value of the guy-on-the-beach's gear.) Sorry if my examples are all Canon but I'm a Canon guy and I don't have much experience with or knowledge about Canon's competitors.
6 comments:
Nicely said! Here, here!
I just ordered a new 56 inch striplight to supplement my existing softbox and umbrella combo.
Oh, and yes I own a light meter too.
I enjoyed the post and think you make a good point.
i figure there is only one way to get people to buy the lighting gear they really need and still allow them the joys of a good brag.
The companies that sell lighting gear need to work on the names of their products. If you don't know what it is, a soft box sounds sort of weak -- not manly at all. You're going to buy an unbrella? that one sounds even worse.
Alien bees is a step in the right direction in terms of a good name. The name is so cool I almost broke a finger typing it into Google, trying to see a picture of the products.
As usual, very well put. Especially in "pretty girl shooting," the quality of the glass and the number of features on the body are less important than one's control of the light. But then, that kind of "most expensive toy is the best toy" attitude is pretty common in American males, maybe in males everywhere, or humans, even.
Not to suck up, Mr. D., but one of the things I like best about your work is seeing how creative you are in getting the effect - light control, wind, etc. - you want. And even better is having you explain it to us. Appreciate that.
Funny you should write this.
I met a photographer lst week with two 1DsII and a 10D. He commented about how I got my photos to look the way they did and what camera I used. I told him that it was a 5D but that didnt really matter as it was the time taken with the lighting that created that effect.
His response was "I dont think lighting is really that important and I dont own any lights or a light meter!"
I didnt know what to say without being rude :)
Thanks for linking to mine and Lin's blog, and the kind comment you left. I've been reading your blog for a while and it was the reason I tried the outdoor shots which were lit with a combination of natural and softbox light. It was a first for me and one that I will be repeating.
Once again, thanks for such a great blog.
photography is ALL ABOUT capturing light.
It isn't until you understand the principles of modifying it to do your bidding that you can become more than "LUCKY" at taking a good picture!
Well I just upgraded from a D1x to a D2x and the only lighting/studio stuff I've bought this year is a Mola Euro and a couple cheapo stands for holding up seamlesses, so I guess overall I'm one of those guys this year. Dang!
Post a Comment