Camera gear in signatures

[JAS_Photo]

JJ, I use an old manual Nikkor 105 f4 on my D300 and I just programmed it into the camera's memory. Now the camera knows when it is attached and what the f-stops are. Of course it is still manual focus. I think it shows the fstops in my exif as well. Going to go check on that.

[JAS_Photo]

Ok yes, it is in the exif data.

[Diana Bolen]

May I add my opinion even though I am new?

I might be stepping on toes, but I think its important.

I do not think there is anything wrong with it at all.

The camera one uses has nothing to do with the outcome of the shot itself.

The camera is just the tool. It's the persons vision, artistic eye, emotion and passion that dictates what is a great photo as opposed to a so so photo.

I use both a manual Nikon and a Canon Digital, but if I did not have the eye or the passion, it would not matter one bit what type or size or power the camera has, the shots would be blah.

I have seen some fantastic, unbelievable shots taken with a Point and Shoot Camera and the price tag of the camera was laughable compared to what I have spent.

I have been humbled by a person who uses a throw away camera.

I really think too many people think its all in the equipment, and its not. Its in you.

[Mad Aussie]

Everyone can add their opinion, new or not I think most of us agree with you.

[jjeling]

I think Im going to disagree, only because noone else here would. :-) I thought you were a man MA. haha

[Michaelaw]

You are breaking a universal law here "Poking an Australian with a sharp stick"

[Mad Aussie]

You are breaking a universal law here "Poking an Australian with a sharp stick"

It's ok .... any time I want I can reach out and touch a real woman I've been married to for 25 years, and NOT get slapped. JJ can't make the same claim ... on either count
In fact ... last I heard ... he lived with other men No inferrence applied here of course .... but you know ... glasshouses and stones

[Fortytwo]

The camera one uses has nothing to do with the outcome of the shot itself.

The camera is just the tool. It's the persons vision, artistic eye, emotion and passion that dictates what is a great photo as opposed to a so so photo.

That's only partially true. I mean, why else do we spend so much money on gear if anyone can do the same with let's say, a 50 euro point-n-shoot? If you use crap, only crap is going to come out. Artistic or not. That why we measure things like noise, CA etc. ect. Otherwise, my old Mavica FD7 would still be usable. It isn't, trust me. But expensive equipment doesn't ensure great pictures, that much is true...

[Mad Aussie]

It all depends how literal you want to take the statement. I didn't. I took it as a general statement and simply assume we are talking about reasonable cameras in the first place. I've seen many photos by good photogs from entry level cameras that crap all over much, much more expensive, better cameras in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they are doing.
But in the literal sense I agree 42 ... better equipment does aid in getting good shots, IF the photog is also good.

[Bambi]

It all depends how literal you want to take the statement. I didn't. I took it as a general statement and simply assume we are talking about reasonable cameras in the first place. I've seen many photos by good photogs from entry level cameras that crap all over much, much more expensive, better cameras in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they are doing.
But in the literal sense I agree 42 ... better equipment does aid in getting good shots, IF the photog is also good.

It's like dressage: a master rider and a high quality horse make the best combination. A master rider can make an ordinary horse better but only to a certain point. A high quality horse in the hands of a poor rider can look less then ordinary.