Skills vs Camera vs Lense.

Being a newbie with no formal lesson and just an entry level DSLR with 18-50mm kit lens K-x) I felt like alien when heard all the new jargon e.g. Av,Tv,Boke etc. But I like taking picture and would like (if God permit)someday making a living with taking picture.

I always think that skill + lense is much more important than the camera itself (atleast that is what I think to comfort myself of having K-x).For me creativity (which is skill) and maximize the lens itself (no matter if you use kit lens) is will make a lot of difference even though you using entry level DSLR.

Would like to know others opinion regarding this thing. Is having a mid-pro camera body make a difference?Will a good lense + better body make a good picture?

I'm thrilled with the K-x. You won't find me making excuses for it. Not for a good few years anyway. Your eye is the most important piece of equipment. If you've got a good one, you'll take good pictures with practice.

The best camera in the world would be useless without the skill of the photographer using it.

Entry level cameras are quite capable of allowing you to produce stunning images, you just need lots of inspiration and lots of practice, and this forum can help with technical issues. if you want to see what your Kx is capable of then search through the Pentax Gallery by camera model link

Hermm...Thanks guy. Good to hear somebody at least sort of aggree with what Im thinking. Will double my effort and work hard (to buy new lenses)

Kx + kit lens is perfect to take great photos. The key is being able to visualise photo oportunities.

I would agree with Peter, I am on a course with people who all using all the other major brands.

Yesterday in the rain we all took the same type (location) shots except for one person, and his was the best of the day, because nobody had seen that shot.

Keep at it, as we all have (had) to, and at some stage it becomes clearer.

Regards

The big photographers of yester-year would be jealous of the gear we have now and funny enough we're all trying to make photos like they did

is it because their photo are more artistic or creative than us? or how hard they do it because of lack of tech that time?

same lens,same way of taking picture but different body....will it make a difference????

I was talking about how the photos looked so artistic and creatively.

Yes and no.
The way the photo looks artistic and creatively won't be different, you can even make very good photos with the camera in your phone if you know your equipment and what you're doing.
There is a difference off course what the sensor brings and other systems that are camera based like the autofocus, white balance, exposure metering, ect.
But will that make a photo better really depends on your way of shooting, because it might suit the other more and it can have some advantage to make it easier to get a good photo but to get a master-piece it's all about your skill.

It depends.

For low light a body with a good sensor can give less noisy pictures or with less camera shake. That's why I am looking to get the K-5 as soon as the price gets sensible.

Better/faster Auto Focus might means the difference between getting the shot or not. Some moments really are moments.

On the other hand a body might not make any difference at all.


For example, I went to Ms Smggy's niece's wedding a few weeks ago. The official photographer had two Nikon D3s bodies and a multitude of lens, boom with lighting umbrella and an assistent.

My K20D/K10D pics were much better. Now because I'm particularly skilled (I can't compete with really good pro wedding snappers, but because he wasn't very good.

I suppose at the end of the day ( it's midnight ) all you can do is work with the equipment you have rather than against it. If that makes sense?

Yes, that all makes sense. The K-x and kit lens is quite enough to make great images with.

The exceptions tend to be extreme examples - so if you want huge prints of specialised subjects in microscopic detail you might use the new 645D. If you want architectural shots that are 100% distortion free you might want a different lens. This is specialist stuff.

Artistically, a good eye and a flair for image making will mean much more.

Well said!

Actually taking technical skill as a given, the only things that really matters are an eye for a picture, having something to say and an emotional empathy with the subject matter. Next is 'visualisation' meaning knowing what the final image will look like and how to achieve that before pressing the button.

There is an awful lot of nonsense talked about upgrading equipment when 99.9% percent of the time it is the photographer's skill that need to be upgraded.

Kimisara, you seem to understand that

We all know when we see a great picture, don't we? It's emotional, visceral and challenging. Having a good eye is different from having true, great talent. We can train ourselves to look for a good picture, but it's rare that we are in the right place at the right time, with our camera ready to capture the 'perfect' image. So equipment is a very small part of the process of capturing the right image. Ironically becoming too obsessed by the technology can become a real distraction from getting out there and practicing your art.