PetaPixel

Humor: Main Photo in Cheap Photography Tips Article Shot with $4.5K of Equipment

mobilefunny

If something seems too good to be true, that’s probably because it is. A great example of this was sent to us by a reader earlier this week when he found one of his photos had been purchased for use by an Austrian publication. Great news, right? Well, not entirely.

The photo is being used at the top of an article on shooting photos without expensive equipment, the caption implying that it was a smartphone camera that yielded these epic results. But of course, that’s not the case.

According to our reader, the shot was taken with a 5D Mark III, 16-35mm f/2.8L II lens, ND filter and tripod that, together, total out to about $4,500 worth of equipment. So much for shooting vacation pictures “without expensive equipment”… some results you just have to pony up for.


 
  • Pickle

    Well, at least they paid him. Pay a fair price for my picture and I will say I took with with the hipster camera of your choice (most of which are featured on this website). Pinhole camera? Sure! Large format with hoodie? Sure! Plastic Toy camera? Sure! Canon? Hell no, keep your money.

  • Tourist

    It looks to me like the entire article has professional quality photos in it. None of them were taken by a cell phone…

  • Mike

    So, you can’t Canon?

  • Jonathan Balch

    well, it’s not nearly as expensive as using a 1Dx and a 200-400 IS. In that sense, they are correct

  • Wallace Bromberg Jr

    It’s a shame that they used that particular photograph, made with the equipment described. There are many, many wonderful images made every day with simple, unsophisticated cameras. The camera is not the instrument. The photographer is.

  • analogworm

    i think you got your last statement wrong. The camera is an instrument, an instrument to the purpose of the photographer..

  • Willi Kampmann

    Right! It’s the same with music: the saxophon is not the instrument; the artist is the instrument! … Wait, what?

  • Aaron Shannon

    +1!

  • Pickle

    No, that wheel in the back is too hard.

  • Chang He

    True, but with progressive levels of unsophistication you accept progressive levels of loss in image quality. In the hands of a master, it’s still going to be beautiful, but it will be different.

  • D.G. Brown

    You know you can lock that, right? ;-)

    (I actually had to recently when a Nikonian friend was using my camera during a shoot :-P)

  • Renato Murakami

    People want to reinforce so much the thing about “it’s not about the camera specs you dolt” that sometimes they just go too far. It’s becoming some sort of self-improvement myth or overdone saying that’s getting kinda annoying and blown out of proportions.
    Yes, what matters most in photography is the photographer him/herself. Tech specs can oftenly be trampled over by creativity. Advanced gear is not an absolute must for all cases, specially if the photographer doesn’t even know how to deal with it properly.

    That said, technical specs of the tool can certainly limit what a photographer can do in several situations. It’s not like only because smartphones can produce good results these days that all technical knowledge, advanced tools and professional gear lost value somehow.

    In fact, for most real professional photography (of the type you are being hired to produce results), more often than not you just can’t let go of a professional line of gear just yet. It has become customary to use terms “like a pro” or “professional level photos” and other terms as “good quality pics of your vacation” or something completely disregarding the part about “professional” were you are doing a paid job that includes specific expectations that can’t be generalized as “good quality”… like it has to work in high res printed magazine, it should still look good on a billboard, all debris and distractions have to be removed, you need to work with lighting as is, etc etc.

  • Gloria Perez

    like Roy implied
    I’m shocked that any body can get paid $6418 in four weeks on the internet .
    Go Here >>>>> W­o­r­k­s­7­7­.­C­O­M­