Pro's with non-pro cameras...

[Its_Oscar]

So I was at an event in Hollywood last weekend and noticed that one of the photographers was using a Canon T1i. Not sure what type of flash or lens he was using but the body was definitelty a T1i. My question is, do pro photographers use these? The reason why I believe he was "Pro" is because I asked who he was with and he mentioned a very well known website.

[ScottL]

Who knows, maybe he was mentioning the website to you because he was afraid of being ousted... There are many "Freelance" photographers that may not use top end equipment, however, they get the job done, and they do it well. These freelance photographers may do an assignment or 2 for a specific mag, website, or news paper, and that is who they associate them self with. I guess what I am trying to say is who knows who he is, if he is professional, and who he is with... The one thing that is known is that a consumer grade SLR can help you take excellent photos. Many of us have seen OK photographers get bad photos from top end cameras and vice verse. The camera is only a tool, the photographer is the driving force behind that tool. Who knows, maybe he was working with his backup...

[Skippy]

Welcome to the Zo Oscar. What Scot says is true. Just because you own and use a NASCAR driver doesn't make you one. :-)

There is a lot of friendly people here and they share their knowledge willingly.

Skippy

[Dikstar]

The T1i can make awesome photo's if you put a good lens on it. Sure, it might not be as quick as the xxD or xD series, but only someone who really knows these things would see the difference between the photo's that come out of this camera and a high-end pro one.

A lot of situations don't require super-fast shooting or really extensive features or 52 focus points. Maybe the guy just likes the size and weight of that camera. Keep in mind that these Rebel camera's are amazing compared to the top of the line stuff we had less than 20 years ago.

I read an article that a lot of journalists who are operating in war zones swear by their Canon G10 and use it rather then a SLR. Because it fits in their pocket (which is handy in case they have to run away from angry men with beards and AK47's) and still makes good enough photo's.

Cos what is really "good enough"? That's the question. Like I said before, most people (excluding maybe some folks here) can't tell much difference between results that different bodies give, it's mostly the lenses.

[DSRay]

My particular definition of a 'pro' camera is that it can produce a sharp 10x16 (double page) at 300ppi, anything more is overkill. Architecture doesn't usually require high burst rates or stop action and I rarely use any other f-stop than 8.

In the bad old days, fine film was capable of recording more detail than the lens could deliver and I suspect the same is true with today's sensors. Seems to me the lens would be critical issue here.

[brucep]

Quite a few people locally know I'm a pro photographer. I also have a decent tripod and bags which many pro's prefer. When I'm testing compact cameras for a Photozo article, for instance, I set up my tripod and mount each camera on it in turn, to get the same image in each camera. I've certainly received some funny looks when I do that! "Why does that guy think he needs a $300 tripod for that tiny camera in broad daylight?"

[wtlwdwgn]

Some pros use a consumer camera as an inexpensive backup to their pro gear. The quality from any camera today is better than from the pro gear of a few years ago and when you need the shot it doesn't really matter what you shoot it with. I sure Ansel could have outdone any of my images with an iPhone! :D

[yellalablady]

Some pros use a consumer camera as an inexpensive backup to their pro gear. The quality from any camera today is better than from the pro gear of a few years ago and when you need the shot it doesn't really matter what you shoot it with. I sure Ansel could have outdone any of my images with an iPhone! :D

Amen, and that just makes me want to cry. lol

[Dikstar]

My particular definition of a 'pro' camera is that it can produce a sharp 10x16 (double page) at 300ppi, anything more is overkill. Architecture doesn't usually require high burst rates or stop action and I rarely use any other f-stop than 8.

In the bad old days, fine film was capable of recording more detail than the lens could deliver and I suspect the same is true with today's sensors. Seems to me the lens would be critical issue here.

Hom many megapixels would you need for that? 8 or something?

[DSRay]

I can coax a sharp 13x19 from 10Mp although I'd much rather use 18Mp (overkill:D)

[Cadwell]

Does a pro make the camera or does the camera make the pro... the answer is neither. The pro makes the pro.

Megapixels are over-rated. We used to do double page spreads quite happily with an EOS 1D (4 megapixel) and EOS 10D (6 megapixel) and no-one ever complained about the quality. I've seen a 4MP EOS 1D image blown up to billboard size and one covering the side of a truck. Nowadays nothings "good enough" unless it's at least 10MP or maybe more.

Welcome to the world of marketing hype. If you choose to buy into it, it's your choice and your money you're wasting.

[anindyanuri]

A pro is that intelligent person who feels the need of the customer and use to carry as less as possible gears to satisfy him. The eye behind the camera remains constant only the gear changes according to the budget of the customer. I don't think there is any divine if a pro shoot with a non pro camera. :)

[Bamamike]

Sometimes you don't want pro-gear, big white lenses catch too much attention!
Yes and Ansel is a very good example, just imagine what he was missing in his old days world: no live view, no histogram, no change of ISO, no switching between color and b&w and, the most important - no endless shooting and delete the crap!
A bow for this master of photography....
Greetings, Mike