yup....that's right. Its EQUALLY important (50/50). 50%. You can't take
good photography if any of those lacking. I actually like to take photo.
But after a while, my Minolta S304 cannot satisfy the performance I need.
And I don't want to splurge on dSLR which is RM4k for Canon 300d at that
time. So I abandon my hobby because I can't even take a photo with
dramatic effect using wide angle lense, or portrait using big Fnumber.
Then what's the point of continue taking photo which does not fit the
requirement. I can't even take good waterfall in long exposure. So its
pointless in photography if you cannot take all the photo you want.
You'll know my sadness if you're stuck in PnS camera....

---

Added on October 4, 2007, 9:30 amAnd one more thing. Suddenly if you got photography opportunity. Your startup of PnS takes forever and you lose the opportunity. Tell me that your 0s startup time of your dSLR is not important?

This post has been edited by gogo2: Oct 4 2007, 09:30 AM

shit..i can't take good photograph with my k750i

am i noob?

you're not. you just don't have the dSLR. Get a dSLR man.. (sigh, lame joke again....)

yup..my first minolta E223 PnS kinda sucks, but that is what i can afford during college time, like photography but eventually have to 'neglect' it cos all sorts of camera limitation (n my skills really sucks that time)

return back to photography this year with another PnS, so far so good, still improving my skill n try to max out my PnS before i m going into SLR (which is kinda a new league to me)

but all the basics still apply in photography, composition can really affect a lot.

ler, bashing PnS like no tomorrow.

let's see which one easier la, take out pns from my pocket and snap Amber Chia who happens to be walking by, or take out DSLR from bag - oops wrong lens mounted. aiyah......... perhaps you're the type that goes around with DSLR on the neck or carry all sorts of lens with you all the time.

PnS has its merits.

---

Added on October 4, 2007, 10:08 amlook, no one's saying equipment is not important (anyone of you say that?) - people are just saying that in terms of important, skills rank higher.

like what i mentioned earlier, skill is the multiplication factor. given same gear, the one with more skill does better.

This post has been edited by goldfries: Oct 4 2007, 10:08 AM

wait, PnS still lose to handphone if u wanna say that. no one lug around pns everyday. do u?

again, skill is advantage. of course the one will more advantage will be better. i dun deny that too.

but again, without gear, how to take good photography?

what i want to stress here is, if you lack of something and u can't perform, mean
that thing is equally important. skill cannot rank higher coz even with skill, u can't take
those photo man. No amount of skill can take certain photo at certain circumstances.

conclusion:
Skill rank the same as Equipment.....

you started it, isn't it? my point was that like it or not, PnS isn't a failure when comes to opportunity shot.



without gear how to take photograph?





define lack.

from what i see in your analogies so far, you're talking about pro with total absense or using really state-of-the-BOTTOM-art gear - which is pointless in the first place.

everyone knows you need to be equip to snap photos.

we should look at it this way

let's say pro with 40D + 70-300mm tele VS newbie with 1D Mk3 + 70-200 F2.8L IS USM snapping sports activity. i'm not surprised if the pro produces better shots as he knows WHAT are the shots to take. you gear super expensive like shit also pointless if you don't know what are the money making shots.

then ok. let's say you put pro with prosumer and newbie with D40 + kitlens, put both of them in the same garden and let them exercise their creativity - again, i'm not surprised the pro still produces better shots.

just 4 a comparison...
i dun think that putting Raikkonen/Alonso into Toro Rosso car will win any race...
however putting any of the F1 racers into Ferrari/McLaren car will win races if not all.

skills can be learned... without good camera 4ever cant take nice photo.
hence, equipment > skill

1 photographer + 2 different cameras = 1 good & 1 bad photo
1 camera + 2 different photographers = 1 good & 1 bad photo
...so no point to compare like these... (1 factor changing while other factors static..of cos the better one will produce better)

what if u put a pro with an olympus underwater camera and a noob but with PADI license with D2xs + lens + pro housing and go take photos of corals and fishes in the sea of the depth of 50m?

see... you can put both of this guys in a situation where it win you your arguement... and i can do it as well...
it is a never ending war...

pro can create good images with what they can get hold of but can they produce images that is up to their own standard? that's the question. i am sure give a k800i phone to a pro and he can still produce decent photographs... but give him his full range of gear and take the same thing... i am sure the quality of the photos are totally different...

give a noob a k800i and a mk3 and chances are, both photos taken from both camera are equally in quality. no offence to noobs though.

give a sport photographer a pns camera and since he cant photograph what he used to, he went to photograph some slightly over-weight chicks... and put it up here on lowyat and i can say that 90% of the forummers here drool saliva and leak cum like there is no tomorrow... but ask the pro himself, is it what he wanted? is it something that he is proud of?

there is a time where the photographer's skill will outlive the equipment he has and he felt that his equipment is limiting his skill... so, depending on different people... sometimes equipment is equally important.

i havent talk about astronaut yet. a sony ericcson k800i on moon?

if you go like that then i might as well also say EQUIPMENT CAN BE BOUGHT.

your 2 different camera - how far apart is that? are we talking low-range DSLR vs high-range DSLR or cam phone vs whatever else that's better than it?


anyway, just the other day I was covering an event and I met a pro photographer who shared many things with me (not local)

me - 350D + Tamron 70-300mm
him - 1dmk2 + Canon F2.8L IS USM 70-200mm

as i continue to talk about gears, at one point he was saying that we can exchange gears and see who produces better shots - clearly he was telling me skill is more important.

and as we talk, i realize how many thing he knows that i don't.

yes, that happened to me for 6 years...next year I'm going to get Canon 40d. Wait for me guys...

Yup, its neverending war because skill complement equipment and vice versa.
Both are 50/50. That's why its never going to end for debating this. And that's
why I won't say equipment > skill. I would say half half....

---

Added on October 4, 2007, 11:17 amcannot if u dun have money.
but skill is different. u dun need to pay money. u just need ur friend to teach u.
or shoot more often with ur cheapo digicam.

---

Added on October 4, 2007, 11:18 amu too tell us skill is more important. doesn't mean that we have to listen to him.

This post has been edited by gogo2: Oct 4 2007, 11:18 AM

your example is exactly like those who give F1 + Pro with PnS situation where gear is actually REQUIRED.

if you take note, the situation i gave has no specific requirement it's a GARDEN. do what you want.

better off pairing pro and noob with the same diving license and gear.



which supports the importance of skill over equipment. (from my POV, it looks that way. sorry if anyone else doesn't)



again. who da heck go snap sports with PnS? alright, who started the pro with pns thing?



IMO the fact that the skill will outlive the equipment shows how important it is.

---

Added on October 4, 2007, 11:22 amthat's because i see the light mah.

but nevertheless, i was arguing for fun. miss debating.

seriously la guys. skill more important or equipment equally important as skill - does it matter? both also important la, 'nuff said.

EDITED : we should pick an argument with people who think equipment is MORE important.

This post has been edited by goldfries: Oct 4 2007, 11:23 AM

did you ask him why he uses the 1dmk2 then? why not 350D? maybe it was given to him by his company... but if he bought the set himself... ask him that question.

gosh..after so long arguement, why there is no comparison of having 2 pro, 1 use prosumer and 1 use god like camera, and see the output

btw - > photoshop > skill and equipment

This post has been edited by harrychoo: Oct 4 2007, 11:39 AM

yeah, me too. I actually not really serious in debating with u guys... kekeke... just for the sake of debating...

so in conclusion from the bolded one, both are EQUALLY important. nuff said...

i agree with you...

that's y equipment is important.

btw...this kind of debate is good & healthy...
it show that we all appreciate what we have.
to all scientists, engineers & pros who created all the cameras, skills, photoshop 4 us

Since you all are talking about skill vs equipment. Let me give some analogy and you do the thinking.

Scenario 1:
Skilled engineer with limited equipment but enough to get the job done and newbie engineer with all the equipment he wants. The job, conduct a verification of the conductance of a mysterious substance. Who will be able to get the job done with the best efficiency?

Scenario 2:
Skilled racing driver driving a 180hp Golf GTi and a newbie driver driving a 430hp Ferrari. Both go head-to-head on a race course. Think of the Stig and you will know what I mean.

Go bang your brains and think which one is more important.

Artistic skills (creativity, good vision) should always come first, followed closely by the equipments.

It's just like a writer mah. His creativity and skills in writing should come before the equipment. The novel can be hand written, a type-writer, computer...
But with better equipment, the writer can write faster, and better, with less hassle. With a computer, he can edit easily compared to a typewriter, therefore less interruption in his work --- which is writing.
All of us have computers, but does it make us good writers? Just makes us write faster & easier only mah.

Same thing with photography lah. You need to have good skills first. Then comes the equipments. Only when your skill becomes very good that the equipments will become the limiting factor.
If you are no good at taking anticipating sports climax moments, no point having a bazooka of a camera. But if you're good, then you would still be able to anticipate the actions with point and shoot. You'd still get good photos, but now the equipment becomes the limiting factor.
Same thing in other photography sectors like portrait and landscape and what not...

So, a good photog can produce good pictures with lousy cameras. But he can produce better/great pictures with better equipments.
A not-so-good photographer will produce mediocre pictures with a lousy camera. But he'll still produce mediocre pictures with a canggih manggih camera.
Equipments are still important, it's just not that important.

Who Will Win???

could u pls b more precise on what is ur opinion...
u just throw out 2 questions

4 ur questions -> people support skill sure say they win... same as 4 equipment

this is bcos u r talking bout novel... novel is abstract n is come out from the author... type-writer/computer cannot b in 2 determine the outcome.

and photo image is captured by camera...that's where it can determine the outcome.