I was just looking around the net for a new camera as mine was the victim of an unfortunate accident with a pavement which broke the battery cover and a few monhs later after using vast rolls of black electrical tape to keep the batteries from falling out i discovered a small chip in the lense, it still takes decent photos (as you will see from the jack daniels and gin picture) but when it comes to landscapes there is a small round blur on the images which is almost impossible to remove even with vast editing.
And so we get back to my trawling the tinternet, I came across a message board on photography and was a little taken aback by the discussion, which to me made the members of this board out to be nothing more than photographic equipment collectors and not photographers.
I feel it's all well and good owning the latest hi-tech camera and expensive lenses etc but does owning these actually compensate for anything, other than the obvious extras you would get with a more expensive model camera compared to say my camera which is just a standard 7.5 mp fuji s5700.
I do wonder if many hobby photographers are more intrigued with the vast amounts of equipment available to them or if they do indeed take up photography for the art of it.
I personally have managed to take some great shots using cheap cameras (under £100) and feel the only reason for me to upgrade is A) my cameras health and B) as I am trying to break into the art world with my images i require at least 10 mp for printing purpouses.
What are your views on this subject? are you more of a collector of photographic memoribilia or are you a photographer who's love of the world around us drives their creativity.
Tags:
Share
-
▶ Reply to This