No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]

[Krob78]

hard to believe the implications here that becuse someone sprays they are also "just praying", as if a high fps was a crutch that real togs dont' need.

+1 Agreed!

 

[Krob78]

On to your second invalid point, who cares HOW I got the shot? Secondly, today I am getting far more shots than I did with previous models. I'm printing way more 8x10's and printing way cleaner files. Why is this so hard to understand?

I have not met a client who cares HOW I got the shot. They care that I got the shot. Do I spray and pray sometimes? Heck yes I do, because I get more great shots and sell more photos and make more money. I haven't heard a client go "well your shot is better but you used the spray and pray method and your competitor used 5 fps and used care and patience so we're buying his shot even though it's not quite as good." I agree with you that you should be skilled in composition and timing, however.

Being a smart photographer is also one who uses equipment that he/she knows how to use to help him/her get the highest quality shots that they can and even the MOST shots that they can. I bought a 1Dx because I knew it would give me cleaner files and a lot more of them. Yes I agree I need to know how to use the gear, and have the skill to use the gear, but all else equal (composition, creativity, etc.) it is nothing but the gear that is increasing my quality at this point. Maybe that will change, but that is the only thing in the last year.

Indeed...

 

[Krob78]

I love being devil's advocate. ;D

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience. That's how I feel about equipment.

Fine, but a proper devil's advocate should present a cogent argument...otherwise, you're merely being contrary and argumentative.

Sure, Let's imagine that at said Olympics, your allowed to be anywhere at anytime but the catch is that your only had a 50mm and a 5Dc. Nothing more or less...

Who would get the better shots? The photographer standing in the convienent photo pit with $$$$$ in gear or the photog allowed anywhere at anytime? I'd put my money on the latter.

Could very well depend on their skill level...

 

[RLPhoto]

I love being devil's advocate. ;D

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience. That's how I feel about equipment.

Fine, but a proper devil's advocate should present a cogent argument...otherwise, you're merely being contrary and argumentative.

Sure, Let's imagine that at said Olympics, your allowed to be anywhere at anytime but the catch is that your only had a 50mm and a 5Dc. Nothing more or less...

Who would get the better shots? The photographer standing in the convienent photo pit with $$$$$ in gear or the photog allowed anywhere at anytime? I'd put my money on the latter.

Could very well depend on their skill level...

I'm assuming that photog's allowed into the olympics have good skill sets.

 

[Krob78]

I love being devil's advocate. ;D

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience. That's how I feel about equipment.

Fine, but a proper devil's advocate should present a cogent argument...otherwise, you're merely being contrary and argumentative.

Sure, Let's imagine that at said Olympics, your allowed to be anywhere at anytime but the catch is that your only had a 50mm and a 5Dc. Nothing more or less...

Who would get the better shots? The photographer standing in the convienent photo pit with $$$$$ in gear or the photog allowed anywhere at anytime? I'd put my money on the latter.

Could very well depend on their skill level...

I'm assuming that photog's allowed into the olympics have good skill sets.

One would assume, however the one wasn't allowed anywhere at anytime... for who knows why. I agree with you though!

 

[Don Haines]

When one follows the logic through to it's obvious conclusion, the answer is clear.

Real photographers do not use "spray and pray" because it's a cheat... you should be able to use skill instead.

Real photographers should also turn off the AF, because it's also a cheat.

Real photographers should turn of IS, it's also a cheat.

Real photographers don't look at the exposure display.... because with skill they don't need it.

Real photographers should NEVER shoot in RAW, because if they were any good the out-of-camera JPG would be perfect every time.

Real photographers do not bracket, their first shot is always perfect.

Real photographers have phenomenally high keeper rates, because every shot is perfect.

Get the point? Real photographers ignore all the tools available to them..... makes me glad I'm a hack who doesn't know enough to turn everything off.

 

[RLPhoto]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

 

[jrista]

When one follows the logic through to it's obvious conclusion, the answer is clear.

Real photographers do not use "spray and pray" because it's a cheat... you should be able to use skill instead.

Real photographers should also turn off the AF, because it's also a cheat.

Real photographers should turn of IS, it's also a cheat.

Real photographers don't look at the exposure display.... because with skill they don't need it.

Real photographers should NEVER shoot in RAW, because if they were any good the out-of-camera JPG would be perfect every time.

Real photographers do not bracket, their first shot is always perfect.

Real photographers have phenomenally high keeper rates, because every shot is perfect.

Get the point? Real photographers ignore all the tools available to them..... makes me glad I'm a hack who doesn't know enough to turn everything off.

LOL +1

 

[neuroanatomist]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

 

[Krob78]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

That being said, I think gear matters. If not, I'd be shooting with my Xsi or my 7D as much as ever. The fact is however I don't, the XSi is long sold and my 7D sits in solitude not seeing much action these days as the acquisition of my 5D Mk III has moved into a place of more relevance, not as a matter of convenience, as a matter of the gear made a notable difference, hence, the gear matters. In my instance anyway!

 

[neuroanatomist]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

Touché.

Let me put it like this - RLPhoto has been clamoring up, down, and sideways for an EF 135mm f/1.8L IS for months (his recent poll, and IIRC, he even photoshopped a mockup of one). Why not just use a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus or even an old manual focus FD 135mm f/3.5? Because...gear matters.

 

[Don Haines]

That being said, I think gear matters. If not, I'd be shooting with my Xsi or my 7D as much as ever. The fact is however I don't, the XSi is long sold and my 7D sits in solitude not seeing much action these days as the acquisition of my 5D Mk III has moved into a place of more relevance, not as a matter of convenience, as a matter of the gear made a notable difference, hence, the gear matters. In my instance anyway!

And to try to get back on subject, I shoot with a 60D. I am thinking VERY hard about upgrading to a 7D2 when it comes out. The 7D is better, but not enough so as to tempt me to buy one. For me, the two big things that would (hopefully) help me are better AF system and higher burst rate, but there are a lot of little things I would not turn my nose up at. I'd like to have it NOW!!!!, but that's just not going to happen. Realistically, I had expected to see it in stores by Christmas.... so a few month's more won't hurt. After all, if you are into wildlife photography, patience may well be the most important skill of all.

 

[RLPhoto]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

Touché.

Let me put it like this - RLPhoto has been clamoring up, down, and sideways for an EF 135mm f/1.8L IS for months (his recent poll, and IIRC, he even photoshopped a mockup of one). Why not just use a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus or even an old manual focus FD 135mm f/3.5? Because...gear matters.

It would be more convenient to use slower shutter speeds at times but hey, I'm getting it done with my 135L. If I only had a FD 135mm F/3.5 I would use it and get results but hey, F/2 would be more convenient.

Give me a camera, and I'll get something out of it. It may not be as convenient but I will get my photo, It'd just be more In-convenient to do so.

Lol, I never photo-shopped that 135L F/1.8 IS USM but thanks for the compliment anyway.

 

[Krob78]

That being said, I think gear matters. If not, I'd be shooting with my Xsi or my 7D as much as ever. The fact is however I don't, the XSi is long sold and my 7D sits in solitude not seeing much action these days as the acquisition of my 5D Mk III has moved into a place of more relevance, not as a matter of convenience, as a matter of the gear made a notable difference, hence, the gear matters. In my instance anyway!

And to try to get back on subject, I shoot with a 60D. I am thinking VERY hard about upgrading to a 7D2 when it comes out. The 7D is better, but not enough so as to tempt me to buy one. For me, the two big things that would (hopefully) help me are better AF system and higher burst rate, but there are a lot of little things I would not turn my nose up at. I'd like to have it NOW!!!!, but that's just not going to happen. Realistically, I had expected to see it in stores by Christmas.... so a few month's more won't hurt. After all, if you are into wildlife photography, patience may well be the most important skill of all.

I think the 7D2 will certainly have an upgraded AF system, which will be great! Burst rate on the 7D is great but I'm with you, if it was a bit more that would be great, if not, I'm okay with 8fps. I like so many others would love to see a dramatic difference in the high ISO area though...

 

[Krob78]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

Touché.

Let me put it like this - RLPhoto has been clamoring up, down, and sideways for an EF 135mm f/1.8L IS for months (his recent poll, and IIRC, he even photoshopped a mockup of one). Why not just use a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus or even an old manual focus FD 135mm f/3.5? Because...gear matters.

It would be more convenient to use slower shutter speeds at times but hey, I'm getting it done with my 135L. If I only had a FD 135mm F/3.5 I would use it and get results but hey, F/2 would be more convenient.

Give me a camera, and I'll get something out of it. It may not be as convenient but I will get my photo, It'd just be more In-convenient to do so.

Lol, I never photo-shopped that 135L F/1.8 IS USM but thanks for the compliment anyway.

Agreed, it is a matter of convenience and we can all say, "give me a camera and I'll get something out of it". The difference is that getting something out of it and getting something great out of it may be two different things, no? So I agree that gear is a matter of convenience, yet I also would be inclined to say "gear matters" for a myriad of other reasons as well, such as quality of your images, which isn't so much of a convenience as it is a benefit...

So for me, "gear matters" and it is a "matter" of convenience as well... You are both correct!

 

[RLPhoto]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

Touché.

Let me put it like this - RLPhoto has been clamoring up, down, and sideways for an EF 135mm f/1.8L IS for months (his recent poll, and IIRC, he even photoshopped a mockup of one). Why not just use a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus or even an old manual focus FD 135mm f/3.5? Because...gear matters.

It would be more convenient to use slower shutter speeds at times but hey, I'm getting it done with my 135L. If I only had a FD 135mm F/3.5 I would use it and get results but hey, F/2 would be more convenient.

Give me a camera, and I'll get something out of it. It may not be as convenient but I will get my photo, It'd just be more In-convenient to do so.

Lol, I never photo-shopped that 135L F/1.8 IS USM but thanks for the compliment anyway.

Agreed, it is a matter of convenience and we can all say, "give me a camera and I'll get something out of it". The difference is that getting something out of it and getting something great out of it may be two different things, no? So I agree that gear is a matter of convenience, yet I also would be inclined to say "gear matters" for a myriad of other reasons as well, such as quality of your images, which isn't so much of a convenience as it is a benefit...

So for me, "gear matters" and it is a "matter" of convenience as well... You are both correct!

Ah ha! Let's say we have a brownie box cam, virtually no controls, with enough fore-thought could you take the presidential portrait with it? I would bet yes, and would wager that it would even be pretty cool.

I started with pretty lousy equipment but when I look back, Some of my favorite shots are with that lousy equipment. Was it frustrating at times? Yes, but I made the photos I needed. Did I have to go out of my way more so than now? Absolutely.

 

[Krob78]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

Touché.

Let me put it like this - RLPhoto has been clamoring up, down, and sideways for an EF 135mm f/1.8L IS for months (his recent poll, and IIRC, he even photoshopped a mockup of one). Why not just use a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus or even an old manual focus FD 135mm f/3.5? Because...gear matters.

It would be more convenient to use slower shutter speeds at times but hey, I'm getting it done with my 135L. If I only had a FD 135mm F/3.5 I would use it and get results but hey, F/2 would be more convenient.

Give me a camera, and I'll get something out of it. It may not be as convenient but I will get my photo, It'd just be more In-convenient to do so.

Lol, I never photo-shopped that 135L F/1.8 IS USM but thanks for the compliment anyway.

Agreed, it is a matter of convenience and we can all say, "give me a camera and I'll get something out of it". The difference is that getting something out of it and getting something great out of it may be two different things, no? So I agree that gear is a matter of convenience, yet I also would be inclined to say "gear matters" for a myriad of other reasons as well, such as quality of your images, which isn't so much of a convenience as it is a benefit...

So for me, "gear matters" and it is a "matter" of convenience as well... You are both correct!

Ah ha! Let's say we have a brownie box cam, virtually no controls, with enough fore-thought could you take the presidential portrait with it? I would bet yes, and would wager that it would even be pretty cool.

I started with pretty lousy equipment but when I look back, Some of my favorite shots are with that lousy equipment.

Indeed, yet it doesn't negate the fact that gear matters... Cave drawings are quite artistic as well, yet the same drawing may look better when rendered with colored pencil than chisels... Although it certainly wouldn't survive the ages!

 

[jrista]

The gear doesn't matter, its just a matter of convenience.

Repeating your fallacious argument doesn't make it cogent.

What about an insinuation that drools with repetition? Does it perhaps make a cogent argument more cogent?

Touché.

Let me put it like this - RLPhoto has been clamoring up, down, and sideways for an EF 135mm f/1.8L IS for months (his recent poll, and IIRC, he even photoshopped a mockup of one). Why not just use a 135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus or even an old manual focus FD 135mm f/3.5? Because...gear matters.

It would be more convenient to use slower shutter speeds at times but hey, I'm getting it done with my 135L. If I only had a FD 135mm F/3.5 I would use it and get results but hey, F/2 would be more convenient.

Give me a camera, and I'll get something out of it. It may not be as convenient but I will get my photo, It'd just be more In-convenient to do so.

Lol, I never photo-shopped that 135L F/1.8 IS USM but thanks for the compliment anyway.

Sorry, but its more than just convenient. At f/2, your maximum blur circle size is much larger than at f/3.5. That allows you to get a thinner depth of field and creamier out of focus background. You can, quite literally, do things with a 135 f/2 that you cannot do with a 135 f/3.5.

It is only "more convenient" from the standpoint of allowing more light in...but then again, it is still not "just" convenient. With an f/2 lens, you GET MORE LIGHT...which means your SNR is higher, which means you have less noise. And no, increasing ISO is not the same...there is a reason why exposure value (EV) is officially adjusted only by aperture or shutter speed, and not ISO. By increasing ISO, you are COMPENSATING for LESS LIGHT (lower EV), not getting a higher EV.

A lens with a wider aperture may be convenient, but it is not JUST convenient...it is more than convenient...it is BETTER. It offers the user more flexibility, more creative freedom, MORE.

The argument is not about "getting *something* out of a camera". Your missing the point. Anyone can get "something" out of "any" camera. A more skilled photographer can get something "better" out of "any" camera. The point that is being made is that with better tools comes more flexibility, greater capability, and improved quality. Put a better camera in the hands of the most skilled photographer on earth...and they will STILL make better photos than if they had a worse camera.

You can't just dismiss the value of a good tool, a better tool, a proper tool. You, my friend, are effectively saying that the only tool a person needs is a hammer! WRONG!! You know how fundamentally invalid that argument is (or at least...I hope you do!!!)

 

[neuroanatomist]

If better gear makes photography more convenient, then gear matters. To say gear doesn't matter, it's a convenience, is an oxymoron. Unless convenience doesn't matter...in that case, why aren't you using emulsion-coated glass and a plate of flash powder?

But you can call it convenient if you want. Your posting history clearly indicates that gear matters to you.

 

[RLPhoto]

Jrista, I do appreciate that you time in your posts with alot of technical stuff.

I disagree, A hammer is one tool, and a saw is another. What matters is the craftsman behind them

Eh, If I didn't have the equipment that I have now I would simply use what I can get. Probably get good results anyway, alittle more trouble though.