Good gear does make a difference....

[HelmutS]

Just to challenge something I've heard from a lot of people (not necessarily here on this site).

You all heard it, too - it's the old mantra of "It's the photoghrapher, not the camera).

This may be true to a certain extend in general photography, but when it comes to something as demanding and challenging as airshow photography, it goes out the window.

Prevouisly with my Fuji S5000 from my three uploades two were rejected, only one made it on here.

Now with the D70 and appriorate glass I have 6 out of 7 accepted, and I would have some more to upload if I feel like it. I'm also fairly sure I can pass a.net quality standards now.

The investment in a DSLR really pays off.

[Petertenthije]

I'm also fairly sure I can pass a.net quality standards now.

Wrong forum mate!

Have fun with your new camera!

[seahawk]

Sure. And in some time you will notcie the difference between a normal lense and a professional lense.

I had no rejections with my Nikon AF-S 300 2.8 yet.

Try the same with the Sigma 135-400 and I get only 60:40.

[Diezel]

I had no rejections with my Nikon AF-S 300 2.8 yet.

Bling, bling...don't leave it somewhere in the field or it will be gone
as I can spot and smell an AF-S 300 2.8 within a radius of 2km.

Roel.

[philip]

Of course a good equipment does make things easier. But for example, the best gear in the world is useless if the photographer cant take good pics and edit them. So it is a combination of both that makes good photos - equipment and skills!

[JJR]

Argghhh!!! So that is whats wrong! Screeners only like people with skills. I don't have any skills, like Numbchuck skills, ninja skills, bo-staff skills..... What the flip? Good equipment is half the battle, giving you better pictures to edit!
-Jay

[jid]

Argghhh!!! So that is whats wrong! Screeners only like people with skills. I don't have any skills, like Numbchuck skills, ninja skills, bo-staff skills..... What the flip? Good equipment is half the battle, giving you better pictures to edit!
-Jay

Not at all !!! screeners only like good images. We don't screen people and we don't screen equipment.

Jid

[Crism]

My 350D w/ 75-300 III USM is just so much better than the F717 it's not even funny. I can go out on the field and get 9/9 shots (queue was full before) and 14/17 shots accepted. The rejected shots are just my fault for uploading when they were iffy.

[philip]

Good equipment is half the battle, giving you better pictures to edit!
-Jay

Now thats just what I said.

[ATrude777]

wow for a minute I thought it was about landing gears and how to take better pictures of them lol.

Anyway I have a nikon coolpix 5400. You can see example of my pictures in the flight review forums under my screen name.

my problems are glare, and that type of stuff. So its not the cmaera, just the enviromental setting. I still have tons to learn about the camera. but does anyone think my camera is pretty good? It was 400, on sale for 200. Got it for my bday.

Alex

[seahawk]

Bling, bling...don't leave it somewhere in the field or it will be gone
as I can spot and smell an AF-S 300 2.8 within a radius of 2km.

Roel.

Well it has been to AMS and Gilze this year. And it will go to Kleine Brogel in July.

[F3Hadlow]

Good Equipment gives the potential for good photos to be taken, the photographer has to operate the equipment correctly to fufill that potential.

[Leftseat86]

Good equipment gives you more capabilities...

It should have NOTHING to do with acception rates.

If you were getting more rejects prior to getting new gear than you were obviously pushing your old kit beyond its limits.

One of the keys to getting excellent photos with any equipment is to find out what its limitations are and always try to shoot to those limitations.

[HelmutS]

If you were getting more rejects prior to getting new gear than you were obviously pushing your old kit beyond its limits.

Well, if "pushing beyond it's limits" means that I want to take more than just static aircraft shots I guess you're technically correct.

But in my own words I would say the limits of cheap gear are such that the photos don't interest me at all.

In that regard you're wrong that gear does have nothing to do with rejection rates. Most people have the aspiration to shoot really nice images, and limiting themself to what a cheap camera can do is not an option.

[Leftseat86]

I disagree.

In my opinion it boils down to poor technique. Unless you are talking disposable throw away camera...

Not to self plug...but I have two editors choice photos taken with a consumer grade 400$ Olympus Digicam. I have taken some of my favorite photos with it.

Moving up to a DSLR just showed me how forgiving they are...it makes it almost too easy. The exposure meters are almost always spot on, the autofocus is lightning fast...it makes it very simple to come away with a nice photo.

The photographer side has and imo always will carry more weight than the equipment side when searching for a great shot.

You have to know when the light is good...where to be and what settings to use...and the limitations of your equipment given the conditions.