Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 16, 2004, 5:27 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Pinto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 11
Default

From Steve's Cannon 20D review:

"Canon has certainly set a new benchmark for what an enthusiast dSLR should be, and the under-$1500 20D even encroaches on the performance envelope of the professional camera's produced by some of Canon's competitors!"

What exactly is today's criteria for an dSLR to warrant the classification enthusiast or professional?
Pinto is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 16, 2004, 5:31 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

well, i think "professional" would be the EOS-1 series...

basically the ones over $2000

Vito
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2004, 6:04 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Setiprime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 484
Default

I don't think money is the whole equation.

The primary benchmark we have to compare to is the 35mm film camera. In ALL its aspects - the closer you get to that criteria, the closer you get to Professional.

Then when you are over that threshold- Medium format raises it's head and we start all over again.
Setiprime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2004, 6:18 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Pinto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 11
Default

Thank you Vito, for your response. But as Steve indicated in an earlier review"

"The first thing we need to point out is that there are now three distinct categories of digital SLR cameras: Amateur, Enthusiast and Professional."

The Nikon D70 and the EOS 300D apparently fall into to the Amateur category, while the 10d and 20D are rated Enthusiast. (Then apparently, as Steve indicates in his review, the D70 redefined Amateur. LOL)

While price might be a minor consideration, I would guessthat if the EOS-1 pricing dropped significantly it wouldn't drop to the Enthusiast category.

If it is accepted that there are three distinct categories, I am just curious as to the criteria. Thanks.
Pinto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2004, 5:16 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Freefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 368
Default

I understand what is being said, but at the end of the day, it is the "Person" that falls into these categories, not the camera. In the past, an Olympus OM-1n or Canon A1, could have been classed as a pro camera, now it is relegated to the realms of an amateur or even classic camera history!! :sad:A pro is the one that goes the extra mile, has the ability/knowledge/experience to see a good photo when it presents itself, or even create one from nothing. It is a constant, everyday task to get the work flowand make the right impact. He/she may, as they look through the viewfinder, in an instant be able to see the finished picture on the front of a mag or as part of an ad campaign and adjust composition/exposure etc. accordingly. They will wait for hours or even days to get the perfect shot. (eric, I would consider you to stray into this category sometimes after seeing your birdshots and effort in getting them! Would like to see a lot more....In fact, what DO you do for a living?). There is a fine line between a pro and a serious enthusiast, put simply, one gets paid for his efforts in $$$´s, the other gets paid in pride in his or her work and immense satisfaction to boot. I suppose it is like the difference between Photoshop Elements 3 and CS! An amateur is just an enthusiast/professional of the future should the "Bug" really kick in!!! Just my Sunday morning humble opinion......
Freefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2004, 2:20 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Freefly... You are refering to me, right? (If not, then I guess I just made a big and embarasing assumption!)
I'm a software engineer. I write parallel computing software used by BIG companies like Sears, Deutsche Bank AG, NTT, and many others around the world. Photography is just for fun (and it can be great fun indeed.) I hope to eventually sell my work but for now I'm just taking lots of pictures and having fun. Selling them seems more like work (and might remove the fun from it) so I haven't gone there yet.

There are two views to this question. One is partially answered by Freefly, the other is sorta what Vito & Setiprime answer.

As to the first direction... the definition of a Pro is a person who makes money at photography. Nothing more and nothing less. We hope that equates to skill, but it doesn't. Firefly's definition is of "a good professional" not "a professional". Common traits in good professionals are things like:
-That they can see the shot they want even without the camera.
-The desire to come back (often many times, or often a year or more later) to get that one shot. (Imaging going "I should come back here in the fall, the leaves will be lovely with that waterfall" and then actually doing it the next year.)
-The desire to wait hours in one spot for the sun to be just right... and after you've done that and taken the picture felt it was worth it.
-The willingness to get up a 3am to drive 2 hours to get to the exact spot and setup in the dark.. and then wait for sunrise at 6. Even in bad weather (often that produces the best/original pictures!)
-Does not view the camera as a fancy gadget to show off but as a tool to get the job done.
-Talks about photography using words like "light" and "shadow" and "feeling" and not "f-stop" and "shutter speed" and "ISO". Because, in the end, photography is just capturing light... and the more you understand that the better you will be (for many types of photography. In other types its just "important".)

To answer what I think Pinto was asking (and Vito & Setiprime addressed.) A professional digital camera is one that performs as well or better than a Professional grade film camera (A non-answer answer!) A Professional camera (film/digital) has many many aspects, some big & some small.
- Built to take a beating and work flawlessly. It just can't break. Period. For example, Pro grade cameras usually have a shutter rated at double (or more) the number of uses in their expected life than a non-pro camera.
- Weather sealing. Pros work in all weathers.
- Very fast, consistant, AF, and AF all the way to F8. This is one place where the 10D, & 20D fall down.
- Good, consistant metering & white balance.
- Consistant, good flash with TTL (of some flavor.)
- Robust flash support (wireless or sync'ed flashes.)
- Exposure and Flash compensation in the camera.
- A wealth of custom/personal settings like Mirror Lockup, second curtin sync, ...
- varying manual modes REQUIRED (Av, Tv, M)
- exposure bracketing, AF/AE lock,
(this is just off the top of my head.)

The EOS1 series of digital cameras (1D, 1Ds, 1D MkII, 1Ds MkII) are all "professional grade" cameras.

I'm not completely sure what the difference is between "Amature" and "Enthusiast" are. Some is cost, in the sense that the person who buys a Canon G6 or Nikon 8800 doesn't expect to spend another $800 (or whatever) in lenses and isn't willing to. But to me, the diffence is disappearing and has more to do with general "effects you work" functionality. How quickly and well it achieves AF & meters, how well it gets white balance right (unless you shoot raw.) How fast it turns on, how good is the lens? That kinda stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freefly
eric, I would consider you to stray into this category sometimes after seeing your bird shots and effort in getting them! Would like to see a lot more.
Thanks.. thank you very much. This is probably the nicest, selfless thing someone has said to me in while. I work very hard at photography, and I like it with others get joy from my work.

I hope to post something today. Did you see this one?
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...09&forum_id=11
I have another from that trip that I want to post.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2004, 3:51 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Pinto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 11
Default

Thank youEric s,
"Very fast, consistent, AF, and AF all the way to F8. This is one place where the 10D, & 20D fall down."
This was what I was lookingfor.
When someone like Steve reviews a new offering, he or she simply does not have the time to spend with a product to insure that it will "take a beating", and will not, atsome point,quit in the field.
He has to have a check list of specific areasof strengths and weaknesses toevaluate for his recommendations.
Thanks
Pinto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2004, 8:59 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Glad I could help.

I do not want to make you think that the 10D or 20D are not capable cameras. Their AF is not "bad". It just isn't as good as a pro camera. I use the 10D and get some good results (check that link I gave.) I know many others who do too.

My experiece is with the 10D, so I'll comment on that. The 10D is way head of many consumer grade point-and-shoots (should be, it costs 3 times as much!) Well, a pro grade camera is a good deal aways ahead of the 10D.

If you have used a consumer grade camera and then tried a 10D, you'd go "wow, this is great". And most would happy with it. Only a few crazy's like some wildlife and sports professional shooters say "the 10D isn't bad, but I need more!" That is where the Pro grade bodies come in.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2004, 6:11 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Freefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 368
Default

Quote:
I hope to post something today. Did you see this one?

Yes Eric, I did see that one, very, very nice (that 600mm is a beast and is on my "Wish" list), and it was partly what I was referring to. Lying down on sand, right next to what looks like an incoming tide, thinking (probably) only of the picture you want. I photographed a model a while back for a marketing dept for a real estate company, and ended up just strolling, fully clothed, waist deep into the surf to get the best pics I could, one of them from the day attached. But I always think it is well worth getting wet/dirty/tired etc. if I end up with a single photo that I love.

And re your career eric, I assumed you must be somewhere among the techno-related masses from your detailed and accurate advice and explanations, thanks for sharing it.

Ho, hum....lunch over, back to work we go!
Attached Images
 
Freefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 18, 2004, 9:08 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I would probably have ended up wondering into the water too. When youre into the photography you don't really think about those other things like "now I have to drive home in wet pants and shoes!"

And ya know... I didn't even think about the tide coming in on me. Oops! Lucky I only got sandy and not wet.

Nice picture, BTW. Good timing on the wave.

Here is a new post:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...49&forum_id=11

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:18 PM.