4 ms·

How many professional sports photographers are there? I guess all those wedding photographers need to look the part with Canon's and Nikon's too. Is that enough

How many professional sports photographers are there? I guess all those wedding photographers need to look the part with Canon's and Nikon's too. Is that enough to keep Canon and Nikon afloat?

sgt101 10y ago
My wife's a professional wedding photographer, so she's got the glass as you say in the game... I'm a dunce photographer, but I've been taking photos using my phone (like everyone) and I enjoyed it, so one day I picked up one of the DSLR's with a "decent" 85mm lens on it and took a photo. The difference is astonishing - it's night and day. The world is filled with light and depth, colours are like bonfires shadows are like the pits of the deepest mine. But then again I guess that's one data point! It may be that in fact phone cameras are great and I'm just deluded.
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  You're completely correct about the difference. You can't take a photo like that with a phone, and you never will be able to. Because physics and economics. But... that kind of quality costs many thousands of dollars, and it's heavy enough to be a problem. You have to decide the weight is worth it before you head out the door for a day of lens aerobics. The market for people who need/want to do that is tiny. This makes me sad, because I love that look, and I hope it never disappears.
  - iamatworknow 10y ago
    >This makes me sad, because I love that look, and I hope it never disappears. I don't think it will for a long time. There's still a market for film photography, if that's any indication.
    - alistairSH 10y ago
      And there are assorted "retro" cameras on the market. If the Olympus PEN-F were weather-sealed, I'd own one already (instead of my much less expensive PL-6).
- criley2 10y ago
  No, it's not a delusion, it comes down to a few simple things like sensor size. I have an entry level Canon DSLR from 2007, 7MP, which takes far better photos than any smartphone I've ever used. The reason is pretty simple, it has a 1 inch square area for its sensor, while the smartphone sensor is about the size of a small pinky nail (1cm squared or less?) For any given period of time, the larger sensor can capture more light at once, either taking better exposed or faster shots, and having far more data in which to encode a digital images pixels. It's certainly insanely impressive what modern hardware and software get out tiny sensors, but bigger sensors are still incomparably better -- AND can benefit from many of the same advances small sensors use. It's kind of like car engines. It's always impressive when someone gets insane performance out of a tiny engine, but no one disputes that a big engine is going to be more powerful than a small one, especially when displacement is the only difference.
  - open_bear 10y ago
    Same story here: used Nikon D40 bought in 2008 is still producing amazing photos.
- Someone 10y ago
  Now put that camera in your trouser pocket. I bet the difference is like night and day, too. "The best camera is the one you have on you" has made those larger cameras lose out on smartphones more and more.
  - alistairSH 10y ago
    As noted elsewhere, that's the beauty of mirrorless system cameras (Fuji X, Olympus and Panasonic μ4/3, etc). I had a Canon Rebel XT for years, but rarely used it because it was bulky. Great photos, but like you said, if you don't have it with you that doesn't do much good. I picked up an Olympus PEN E-PL6 two years ago and with a standard prime, it fits in a jacket pocket or small bag. Doesn't fit in trouser pockets, but it's small enough to carry around on vacation without being a nuisance. And can still take an assortment of lenses (I regularly use a 9-18mm wide angle and a 17mm prime). My wife uses a Canon S100, which is truly pocketable. And still produces a way better photo than a smartphone (although that gap is getting narrower by the year, especially in good conditions). But, all that said, 80% of our photos are with the smartphones, because they're always with us.
- pfd1986 10y ago
  Care to share her portfolio? perhaps over pm, if you like. I'm looking for one atm =)

How many professional sports photographers are there? I guess all those wedding photographers need to look the part with Canon's and Nikon's too. Is that enough to keep Canon and Nikon afloat?

sgt101 10y ago

My wife's a professional wedding photographer, so she's got the glass as you say in the game... I'm a dunce photographer, but I've been taking photos using my phone (like everyone) and I enjoyed it, so one day I picked up one of the DSLR's with a "decent" 85mm lens on it and took a photo. The difference is astonishing - it's night and day. The world is filled with light and depth, colours are like bonfires shadows are like the pits of the deepest mine. But then again I guess that's one data point! It may be that in fact phone cameras are great and I'm just deluded.

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
You're completely correct about the difference. You can't take a photo like that with a phone, and you never will be able to. Because physics and economics. But... that kind of quality costs many thousands of dollars, and it's heavy enough to be a problem. You have to decide the weight is worth it before you head out the door for a day of lens aerobics. The market for people who need/want to do that is tiny. This makes me sad, because I love that look, and I hope it never disappears.
- iamatworknow 10y ago
  >This makes me sad, because I love that look, and I hope it never disappears. I don't think it will for a long time. There's still a market for film photography, if that's any indication.
  - alistairSH 10y ago
    And there are assorted "retro" cameras on the market. If the Olympus PEN-F were weather-sealed, I'd own one already (instead of my much less expensive PL-6).
criley2 10y ago
No, it's not a delusion, it comes down to a few simple things like sensor size. I have an entry level Canon DSLR from 2007, 7MP, which takes far better photos than any smartphone I've ever used. The reason is pretty simple, it has a 1 inch square area for its sensor, while the smartphone sensor is about the size of a small pinky nail (1cm squared or less?) For any given period of time, the larger sensor can capture more light at once, either taking better exposed or faster shots, and having far more data in which to encode a digital images pixels. It's certainly insanely impressive what modern hardware and software get out tiny sensors, but bigger sensors are still incomparably better -- AND can benefit from many of the same advances small sensors use. It's kind of like car engines. It's always impressive when someone gets insane performance out of a tiny engine, but no one disputes that a big engine is going to be more powerful than a small one, especially when displacement is the only difference.
- open_bear 10y ago
  Same story here: used Nikon D40 bought in 2008 is still producing amazing photos.
Someone 10y ago
Now put that camera in your trouser pocket. I bet the difference is like night and day, too. "The best camera is the one you have on you" has made those larger cameras lose out on smartphones more and more.
- alistairSH 10y ago
  As noted elsewhere, that's the beauty of mirrorless system cameras (Fuji X, Olympus and Panasonic μ4/3, etc). I had a Canon Rebel XT for years, but rarely used it because it was bulky. Great photos, but like you said, if you don't have it with you that doesn't do much good. I picked up an Olympus PEN E-PL6 two years ago and with a standard prime, it fits in a jacket pocket or small bag. Doesn't fit in trouser pockets, but it's small enough to carry around on vacation without being a nuisance. And can still take an assortment of lenses (I regularly use a 9-18mm wide angle and a 17mm prime). My wife uses a Canon S100, which is truly pocketable. And still produces a way better photo than a smartphone (although that gap is getting narrower by the year, especially in good conditions). But, all that said, 80% of our photos are with the smartphones, because they're always with us.
pfd1986 10y ago
Care to share her portfolio? perhaps over pm, if you like. I'm looking for one atm =)