Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Does gear matter?

arun.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Does gear matter?

#31

Post by graphe »

cruffle_duffle wrote: post #24
pflenker wrote: post #10

What this article doesn't mention is that over time, cameras have made _huge_ leaps and bounds, while the author was transitioning through the phases he describes. It's likely that had he been already at the final stage of competence at the beginning, gear would have mattered a lot more. Cameras back then were just not able to provide good pictures in settings with non-ideal light conditions, for example. Sometime in…

> I guess if we repeated that experiment nowadays it would be the other way round. As somebody with a long unused DSLR packed away… I’d say it depends on the lens. Maybe. One thing that iPhones still can’t do as good as a DSLR is very low light (eg starfield), however the current crop of phones are getting pretty good at even this. Those DSLR’s are huge and quite frankly their workflows aren’t as smooth as on phones.…

The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras. If you don't do astronomy it will usually be better.

The Samsung NX had wifi and upload to fb.

Re: Does gear matter?

#32

Post by munchler »

gadders wrote: post #8
readthenotes1 wrote: post #4

My stepmom took a picture of a relative that was simply enchanting. I mentioned to my dad how nice it was and commented "she must have a really good camera" to which my dad replied, after laughing, "people have said that before and it doesn't seem to matter what camera she's using"

My wife's a pretty good family photographer (i.e. doesn't do it professionally) and she used to get the same. I bet nobody goes up to authors and says "Great book - what pen did you use?"

A lot of people are interested in the process behind good writing, up to and including what word processor or analog technology the author used.

Re: Does gear matter?

#33

Post by munchler »

pompino wrote: post #21
gadders wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife's a pretty good family photographer (i.e. doesn't do it professionally) and she used to get the same. I bet nobody goes up to authors and says "Great book - what pen did you use?"

Its not the same, the act of taking a picture is seen as simply pressing a button - which is true. The process of designing an image isn't. So if you were an art director in a studio in charge of the look of the model, hair, makeup, etc, nobody will question your credentials, but if you were the photographer hired to simply take the photo, then you're merely an operator of an instrument, not someone with a creative v…

Most writing these days is also done by pressing buttons.

Re: Does gear matter?

#34

Post by photon_collider »

This is a subject that comes up frequently in photography. I think this is because many novice photographers think they need a fancy camera to take good pictures.

Gear, particularly the lenses you use, matters depending on your preferred genre of photography. Beyond that, the difference between and low and high end cameras tends to be build quality and the ease of use.

It's important to remember that these are just tools. I've learned that everyone shoots differently, so it's important to find the right tools that work best for you.

Re: Does gear matter?

#35

Post by vladvasiliu »

pflenker wrote: post #10

What this article doesn't mention is that over time, cameras have made _huge_ leaps and bounds, while the author was transitioning through the phases he describes. It's likely that had he been already at the final stage of competence at the beginning, gear would have mattered a lot more. Cameras back then were just not able to provide good pictures in settings with non-ideal light conditions, for example. Sometime in…

> I guess if we repeated that experiment nowadays it would be the other way round.

I doubt that. I'm not a pro photographer by any means, but my 2016 olympus pen-f (m4/3 format, so the sensor area is a quarter of "full frame") wipes the floor with my iphone 14 pro it's not even funny. Had a friend the other day comment on some random pics I took in a bar with the pen-f, as seen on the phone's display: "how come your pictures look so good?". The subtle gradients, the details in dark areas, the barmaid's skin texture, all this looks like plastic on the iphone.

Sure, neither is technically a "now-current" device, but I don't think there have been any earth-shattering improvements between the 14 and the 15. I hear some Android phones might have superior cameras, but again, I doubt it's a night and day difference with the iphone. The Olympus is 8 years old, and even when it was brand new it wasn't exactly state of the art. A recent model m4/3 would be a noticeable improvement, and a full-frame sensor would be in a whole different league.

But one point where the iPhone (and similar androids) have the "real" cameras beat: it fits in a men's jeans pocket.

Re: Does gear matter?

#36

Post by graphe »

pjc50 wrote: post #15

"The hobby" and "the gear associated with the hobby" are effectively two separate sorts of fandom. Not just for photography but for music and other activities. Outdoor sports. Cookery. Crafting. You can encounter detailed, militant fandoms for types of lens from people who don't own it and don't take photos.

There is a "hobby" of consumerism like audiophiles who talk about FLAC and have tons of "good" expensive headphones they don't use. Same with photography. The best tied together hobby and consumerist collection is in trading card games.

Re: Does gear matter?

#37

Post by vladvasiliu »

graphe wrote: post #31
cruffle_duffle wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess if we repeated that experiment nowadays it would be the other way round. As somebody with a long unused DSLR packed away… I’d say it depends on the lens. Maybe. One thing that iPhones still can’t do as good as a DSLR is very low light (eg starfield), however the current crop of phones are getting pretty good at even this. Those DSLR’s are huge and quite frankly their workflows aren’t as smooth as on phones.…

The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras. If you don't do astronomy it will usually be better. The Samsung NX had wifi and upload to fb.

> The lidar on iPhones makes low light way better than cameras

How so? My iphone 14 pro looks like a cartoon if I shoot people or animals in low light. Never had any "actual camera" look that bad, and my newest is an 8 year-old micro 4/3 model.

Re: Does gear matter?

#39

Post by graphe »

jebarker wrote: post #9

I'm at the early stages of learning photography. I've always taken lots of photos, but without much skill or care. I have an entry level DSLR and understand that the quality of my photos is almost entirely determined by my skill as a photographer. However, I don't really enjoy using the DSLR due to the size and weight. Any recommendations on what might be a better setup for me? I like travel and nature photography, b…

I bought a peak clip clone, you can get a Spyder or one of the clones. Keep the strap on you for the peak and you'll be taking way more photos than you'll know what to do with.

I rarely bother now because of crime, I just pocket a pancake and mirrorless.

Re: Does gear matter?

#40

Post by nox101 »

jebarker wrote: post #9

I'm at the early stages of learning photography. I've always taken lots of photos, but without much skill or care. I have an entry level DSLR and understand that the quality of my photos is almost entirely determined by my skill as a photographer. However, I don't really enjoy using the DSLR due to the size and weight. Any recommendations on what might be a better setup for me? I like travel and nature photography, b…

Get/Make a camera case for your smartphone ... I'm only half joking.
Post reply on HN