That’s awesome that you took the time to explain to them the details of photography without sounding condescending or impatient. Sometimes these things take time to learn and hopefully they will now empower other future photographers 💯
It’s always a pleasure to be able to share what I know with others 😊 that the main reason why I started all of this, just to make learning photography a little easier 🫶
Thats right and sometimes it needs calm people like him they share the knowledge to others. He gave him an inspiration to His next step in photography.
When you said “every camera body is good” you earned my respect. It’s really cool seeing you take these folks under you wing and show them something that blows their mind. However simple. It’s really cool. Props!
I shoot with canon rp, Canon R and nikon d750 on my work And my personal camera is an old fckn Canon 1200d with 50mm 1.8 lens And it films sooo good. I like the colors and it's a killer with this lens. It only costs around 100 bucks and lens coasts around 120 bucks, and this is a killer for this price
Yes, and no depends when you get to like the exact little things and types of niche photography the body does matter but that’s usually niche photography types
@@Hellothis12157knbhb well obviously, but the body still doesnt matter, unless you're some international pro that needs the absolute best like the r3, then the body does not matter
For video I’d say the body matters. Everything from color science to log formats (basically like raw but for video). Aliasing, and just overall image quality can be very noticeable on a cheaper camera vs a more expensive
Different context different problem. You don't really care about lens when you are taking landscape as long as you get rid of vignette, distortion, and it's sharp across at f8 or f11 (even if it's not sharp you can composite multiple pictures). Most modern kit lens can do this (except you Sony pancake 1650) Portrait is a different matter, out of focus background becomes a tool to use, so you need fast lens so you can make different composition to make the portrait more flattering. If you're shooting still cars, you can do focus stacking to get similar effect to fast lens. This also can lower the iso noise.
As a beginner, I think it’s part of what inspires you to continue to shoot & learn… a nice lens is easier to get great keeper shots but you can get great shots with any lens/camera. As a musician, I like to relate it to a guitar…. can you learn to play on a cheap guitar? Yes, but you will probably play longer if you have a nice setup.
Recently took my kit lens out on a hike. I was impressed by the photos! I hadn't really used it since I bought my camera, about a year and a half, so I think just a bit of experience really helped out. Gotta love how small the kit lens is, too!
When I started in 9 yrs ago with a kit lens there was a problem. Absolutely no understanding about how to use the camera nor proper way to use the kit lens. Then I bought a 50mm f1.8, sigma 70-200mm f2.8, sigma 50-100mm f1.8 art. Learned some things. Went back to my kit lens and took some good photos. However as we all know the best portraits come from good glass.
Buy a prime lens. Use both the prime lens and your kit lens. Kit lenses aren't always garbage but there are just some things you can't do with them. If you WANT an out of focus background there's no work around. Get a nifty fifty or another fast lens
Right? Some of my best shots were taken with the Canon 18-55. Better glass will open up more photo opportunities for you, especially in challenging situations, but you've still got to possess the technical knowledge, drive, and instinct to take advantage of them.
Its not about the focal length, listen,18-55 is awesome.. But Its the aperture that holding u back 3.5 - 5.6 is sucked... I wish i can save enough money to get 30ish to 80ish mm with f 1.8 so low light conditions doesn't bother me anymore and i can take a better portrait photos..
The kit 18-135mm is better. Better build, glass, and reach. But it's rare. I have the 10-18mm, 18-135mm, and the 55--250mm for my apsc. (Also 24mm f2.8, and the 500 1.8) this covers 90% of shootings. Other lenses I use less often; I have....135 f2, 100-600 5.6, and other fast glass that is all manual. The live in a case. They come out when needed, bit are left behind on most outings.
Remember. Composition is king. Bodies and lenses are just tools for what you can create. They may limit a certain vision, but you can get pretty damn close if you just focus on composition and technique.
@SkyevoIIt's like having a huge tool kit spending more makes sure you have the perfect tool for the job but you need experience and knowledge how to use it fully
Actually the kit lens is fine to use if you have the right lighting and space to use it on a subject… hence the Aperture range and focal length… “hey all cameras are fine it’s your lens that sucks…get a new lens like mine and you’ll instantly be a better photographer!” Wrong… learn every limitations that your camera and lens has and how to maximize the composition with what you have despite their limitations… basically if you learn what it takes to get a great image from a Polaroid point and shoot fixed lens and fixed flash then you can get a great image using anything… learn photography as a whole and you will shoot circles around those people who need the next great camera body and the best and fastest wide open lenses!
I agree. Firstly, most lenses aren’t their sharpest at their widest aperture. Also, depending on your subject you may not want a wide aperture. There’s probably other qualities with certain kit lenses that beginning photographers don’t like such as distortion, bokeh shape, flares, or lack of sharpness either all around or at the corners.
@@dkd123sharpness is irrelevant. Wide open such as 1.4 and f/2 give a look that is much better than a lens that’s wide open at 4 or 5.6. The blurry background is what a lot of people want when they buy a real camera
@@dkd123dude that’s literally only for film lenses and third party garbage, or maybe if you’re at 0.95 with a noctillux but at that point sharpness doesn’t matter
@@Drpftnst that is not true, it depends what you are shooting. Doing street photography on a 2.8 or a 1.4 close up will be a nightmare. You will lose focus all the time, it won‘t make fun and also your pictures will be crap. As a wedding photographer im rarely using an apeture under f4 in a daylight scenario. Bad photographers always want that depth of field, but, if that defines a good picture for you, you are just that, a bad photgrapher.
Bro out here giving bad advice. If you're not happy with your photos, buying a new lens is just a band-aid solution. Get better as a photographer with a kit lens before you spend money. A good photographer can use a kit lens and get better photos than an amateur with the best lens in the world.
In the beginning I loved my kit lens, and was proud of what I came out with. But the more I shot with it the more imperfections I saw, and what I know can be achieved I wasn’t reaching. If they are dissatisfied with where their photos are now, then they are growing as a photographer. His advice is spot on.
@@joshuawalker6863"in the beginning I loved my kit lens" and there's the difference between you and him. He said "why does this camera suck" with his kit lens and the answer is it didn't, but neither did his lens. He was taking bad photos then he bought a shallow depth of field lens and band-aided his photos. You can tell this because his advice is to buy a lens with a low aperture and that will make them happy with the photos they take. Shallow depth of field is a band-aid fix to bad composition. It's bad advice. It's not like he's suggesting they need the lower light capability, they're in a brightly lit car show. There's plenty of light.
@@danielarmstrong2144I kinda get it I am a beginner and my friends suggested to directly get a a7c and ditch the kit lens for a 28/f2 and yea my skill suck but I can just bokeh my way out of it… until I got a zoom lens 24-70 f4 suddenly I can’t f2 my way out of shitty lighting and it force me to think But he is also right don’t be like me forcing to buy a expensive body then have no budget to get a good lens cause logically yea u can just buy a better lens later but when u already spend so much and then getting mediocre result you will think “another purchase to make my photo look good ? what is this bullshit?”instead of forcing yourself to learn better skills cause your brain directly want result If u buy a balance of both you have no more reason or things to blame except your skill forcing you to to learn
@@Sathornetfire yup, that's why _"buy better gear"_ will always be a bad advice for beginners, when camera + kit lens from the past decade are fully capable of taking great pictures. If someone is unsatisfied with their picture, it's most often not a gear issue but is unironically a skill issue.
Im partially agree with your point, it works as a charm especially for beginners starting out from their kit lens. However, actually our inner knowledge, experience, creativity .. are what matters most, many pros can get away easily even with wide focal length small aperture open and still produce great image with emphasis on the main subject, telling the story without the need to blur out all the background
Sometimes it can be both depending on your intentions. An APSC overheats faster in a cage when doing underwater photography, you can adjust the heating on a Sony a7 camera to prevent it from shutting off. Older cameras can't shoot Log and each manufacturer has their own version of Log that's intended for flat imaging. Sony (S-log) Nikon (N-log) Canon (clog). Zooms has become just as good as primes and stops the need of getting multiple focal ranges. I would recommend that you check out each camera's limitations and capabilities. Some has a color profile that's more favorable towards blue (Nikon) with another is green (Sony), or even warmer tones (Canon). You can fix it but just something to be aware of. There's a limitation on the amount of lenses available and warnings if you intend to use a logi chip adapter to use lenses from other brands.
@@sold-productions No, I understood that. Some people likes the look that a vintage camera or lens gives. Sometimes, you need the proprietary body to fully utilize the lens or else one of two things will happen: can't get the proper image or it will say "err". I just wanted to share other perspectives that were not covered.
Agreed. I never care what happens to my camera body but the lenses are the most important to me. However, technique and style are also essential. I’ve seen people make magic with the basics
I have the Tamron 20mm and I hate it, there’s so much distortion I don’t think I could get a straight line if my life depended on it. I need to pick up some more lenses so I can see how they compare.
@@liam4184 if I use the lens correction in Lightroom it causes the image to be stretched out in obvious ways, it’s kind of okay for natural landscape shots. Doesn’t work that well for architectural stuff and for anything with people. I can also crop the image more to try to deal with that but since it’s a cheap glass, the optical resolution is not that great so the cropped image isn’t good.
I bought a Canon 750D just a few weeks ago, 3 lenses included. 18-55mm, 28-80mm and 55-250mm.sold the first two, kept the 250mm and bought right away a 50mm 1.8, 24mm 2.8, and a vintage pentacon 50mm 1.8...out of all lenses, the pentacon its the best one.. Has a special space in my heart ☺️
@@KahruSuomiPerkele its pretty much the same camera, just a minor difference which I can't even remember any more 😂 I think it might be the round dial instead of arrows. Which 35mm have you got?
get a manual lens and do it yourself. autofocus has it's uses, but if you're at an event or something and taking your time anyway, use that time to nail focus and composition.
Also keep in mind all lenses don't autofocus equally. I have an 85mm prime and it sucks at focusing and focus hunts like crazy in low light, and I have an expensive camera body that preforms way better with other lenses so some lenses are just different. Some lenses have better autofocus for video, some for photos, some have different motor technology
I love when people get together and talk about something they enjoy and one person helps another out. Great stuff, and I learned that I need a low aperture lens for my camera. ❤
The main secret is you don't need as low aperture as possible. You need to understand where and when you will use your camera. Because a low aperture lens doesn't give you any creativity, vision, and understanding. But it’ll take some money from your purse.
Couldn't agree more. I was using a kit lens for my earlier photos, and they were just okay. Picked up a Sigma 56mm f/1.4 and my photos are a hundred times better. The lens you use makes a HUGE difference.
i will gladly support that. and most important is the person take photos. i seen plenty of photographer with $$$ camera but the photos bad. angle,time,subject is how your potray your picture. trust me. beginner camera can rivals professional camera if you know what to do. yes it slow camera,hard to use compare to expensive camera. but if you take 10 photos. there will be only one you need to pick. just take a lot of picture and find the nice one and learn from that. then test the limits of your camera. if you reach the limits of your camera. then it will be worth to change your gears
Don't let him fool you. 95% of a good photo is the subject, composition, color, balance, etc. The other 5% is the body and lens (lens being more important as mentioned).
Was shocked at what he said to get a better lens because I completely disagree; kit lens are good! It's just a skill issue if you cant make bangers without relying on some bokeh. It's good that a majority of the comments disagree and it's a matter of how you take the photo regardless of a fast lens or not. Because what sense is a fast lens if you can't even tell a good story unless you only shoot portraits
@@dmgg8917a good lens does not only shine through its bokeh, its the sharpness of the lens, which is often lacking on the ends of a zoom, chromatic aberrations, vignetting, morphed edges etc. I agree that you should learn to use what you have but a good lens is more than its bokeh. You can see that many of his pictures sre not taken with a 1.4 aperture, so there is obviously more to it.
Agreed. Almost every photographer uses editing to make their images pop and stand out. I remember in high school I decided that I'd rather take a bomb photo with the camera and lens than to edit a photo to be bomb. This meant that I'd have to use EVERYTHING to get that bomb photo first. A great photographer should be able to do that without having to rely on post-edits like this guy. His previous images looked basic before he edited them.
I love it when other photographers ask me for advice, especially beginners. I’m still learning newer stuff everyday and I never hesitate to share my knowledge with newcomers. Photography is art and there should be zero gatekeeping in photography.
For entry level I absolutely agree. Lens + edition skills is way better than a camera body. But as you get used to the limitations of your camera, you start to notice some aspects that may be cutting your potential. I have a canon200d, and I've noticed some lack of definition under some conditions, the poor HDR (which most of the time isn't a problem, I just take darker picture and increase the shadows in editing). But still, I agree lens and editing skills do compensate those camera limitations. Most of the time you can go around it
It depends what you’re taking photos of, this is great information for beginners in this video. Camera bodies are important but yes the lens is the most crucial part of the look of an image. You can use the kit lens for a lot of things and get a lot out of it if you know what you’re doing - they’re versatile and cheap to make so they’re great to start out on and even use for casual shooting. You can use them professionally but it can be more difficult to achieve the look you want. A blurred background does look nice and the full frame look with a wide aperture is desirable but of course it has its place and there are a variety of different ways to approach an image. The most important thing is shooting with your heart and mind, showing personality in your photos - when that’s married with a good level of technical understanding and a good feel for your kit, you can take off. Equipment nowadays is so good that any beginner has the potential to progress very quickly. It may very well be a dying way to make money but it enriches your life and makes you see things differently.
I mean..it’s not even the aperture in this scenario (from those distances) that make the difference. It’s the perspective. That’s the “lens”. The taste. Which varies wildly between different people as they become better at photography over time. A great photographer can make a kit lens shine. Tools matter but ultimately experience helps nail a shot.
you missed the point a bit. sure you are correct but he is saying instead of thinking "my camera is not good enough" think instead "my lens is not good enough" people get caught thinking they need the newest camera body when a dslr from 2011 is still good enough for pro work
@@darthsnarf and even in that context he's still wrong. Their kit lens would be perfectly capable of taking great picture of cars in this well lit environment, and yet he's pushing them to waste money on faster lenses before polishing their craft. All his advice would lead to is covering the beginner's poor skill behind pretty blurry backgrounds. It's just bad advice, _"get better gear"_ doesn't work 9/10 times. Good image with impeccable composition having lens imperfections would still be preferable over poor image with perfect pixel sharpness and dreamy bokeh.
A good Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Rodenstock, Schneider lens will give you incredible pictures. Even old Leica R lenses are still stunning. The main reason is not sharpness, but Microcontrast, colours and general rendering
I think what some people get wrong here is that kit lenses themselves are not necessarily bad. What they do is, the set strong limitations regarding your aperture selection. But also they allow amateurs to zoom instead of moving closer or farther away which often results in beginners standing as close as possible to the subject while realizing that it only fits into the frame if they zoom out. What they will end with are "smartphone pictures" in the range of 24mm, F3.5 often leading to frustration why they spent so much money on a camera that doesn't make the pictures look like they expected. Not saying that kit-lenses may never work, but the very first thing in photography for me was to really understand! which parameter does what. What dies 35 mm and what does 85mm mean? Why can you make the background blurry/in-focus? For all these things you need flexibility (different lenses, primes, telezooms...) Then, you can make great photos even! with kit-lenses.
For sure, ever since I bought my Sony a 6000 I hated my kit Len I thought the camera had really bad quality, but then I purchased the Sigma 35, 1.4 art lens and that’s when the table flipped.
Definitely some decent advice. The first thing I did to level up my photography was pick up a vintage 50mm f1.8 just being a prime lens helps so much But I think leaning the art side of things is more important but definitely a great first step is picking up a prime lens
Yeah absolutely agree 😊 the guy I was giving the advice to had already built an amazing foundation of photography skills but wondered what gear he should be upgrading. You definitely have to build that foundation first before investing in more gear 🫶
What he's not mentioning is the crucial role of editing and composition in achieving a professional look. Simply having a good lens and taking random pictures isn't enough; lacking the necessary skills can hinder the outcome. Surprisingly, some individuals using smartphones produce better pictures than those using high-end cameras due to their adeptness in composition and editing, which significantly enhances the overall quality of the image. Additionally, there's the whole topic of lighting.
"the single most important component of the camera is the twelve inches behind it" - Ansel Adams. Hey yourself right before worrying about the camera and lense
Yeah every body is good! But during my photography journey, aps-c to FF was definitely one of the biggest leaps in quality. Mainly 3 factors: better low light performance (less noise at higher iso), larger dynamic range, higher quality lens collection. Other minor differences would be in body stabilization, which most aps-c cameras lack, and 1/8000 shutter speed. If you shoot in bright daylight, the differences will be minimal, but if you like shooting at night like me, go for Full Frame! Also, you can also try buying FF lens first and test it out on apsc bodies. FF lenses tend to have larger diameter so they lead to better bokeh rendition, and you are only using the center section of the lens, so whatever FF lens you are using, the whole image will be sharp.
It’s a mix of everything. Your feeling for perspectives, camera, lens, good feeling for colors shadows and lights at editing and so on… It’s a constant process of learning 😌
Depends on what you're shooting, I did some cool shots with a basic 18-55 lens. Of course if you're going to take pictures of a cars or doing portraits it's going to suck a little bit because you'll have no subject/background separation. Go outdoor and you'll see that a f1.4 wont be that useful, because you'll probably want to stay between f5.0 to f8.0
When I did photography as a hobby as a teenager, I always used to see people with more money than sense with 5DS Mk2s (the most expensive at the time), stock lenses, and not knowing how to get a good picture. I had a 350D and always planned to upgrade the body, but ended up keeping it for years and just upgrading the lenses. There was never a need for more than 8MP since none of us are looking at our photos at such a resolution anyway.
@@lifethroughoptics That’s the thing man, and it’s not even about the lenses. There’s beauty in life everywhere, we just have to learn how to capture it. I think people forgot what photography used to be about in the first place: capturing a moment in time. That’s all photography is, we’re supposed to capture a moment in time that’ll never occur again. So it doesn’t matter what body or how much it costs, the moment in time is all that matters~
I see this all the time with film photographers too! They kept asking what camera body is good but truth is its the lens system is what matters. Reason why I use mainly Minolta and Canon lenses now when I'm shooting film is the price and absurd gorgeous quality you get from these old lenses
you dont need a low aperture for good pictures. most of my favourite images and most well known photographers shoot at f8 or higher. what matters most about a lens is colour representation, fringing and sharpness.
100% correct. Felt and found out the same reason after I got my mirrorless camera. Then bought a 50mm prime lens for my first glass aside from the 24-105mm and definitely saw the difference. That aperture helps a lot.
It is also the body... Shooting with APS-C in low light will have noticeable noise in pictures, while with Full frame you can get clean pics without the noise with less light. Colors and dynamic range is also usually better in full frame. Also some bodies have stabilization while others don't. No in body stabilization will easily cause fuzzy photos shot from hand.
I tried this exact setup at a convention recently: and oh boy was it refreshing. I normally use a Tamron 17-70 f2.8, and I absolutely adore that lens, but being able to drop down all the way to f1.4 and simply understanding the focal lengths of the lens really allowed me to focus on framing a good shot, one that was wide enough to allow for corrections rather than just zooming the shot into view. Absolutely blown away by what Sigma has done with the 30mm f1.4, I’m looking forward to picking up their 16mm and taking that for a spin.
This is what we need!!! Photographer's who actually explain photography, what all the terms and numbers mean!! So many people walking around with Rebels and D3000s and not knowing anything outside of auto mode.
“Limitations are the breeding grounds of creativity” I grew up with a sony a6000 and did many events, real estate photography even print work all on my kit lenses and a few $50 primes. I recently got the Sony a7iii and while I do see a difference in depth of field at lower apertures (due to the lense I have with it) you can produce amazing images from both. Gear being the problem is only an excuse. Researching the first pinhole camera’s are humbling.
It also depends on how you shoot the subject. I mean, yeah lens matter, but it's not the only factor. As what the other comment said, if you know your body and lens limitations, you should know how to overcome it and bring the best of that. Upgrade only if you really need it. I still use 15-55 kit lens from my fuji package, and I'm quite happy with it, as long as you know what are you doing with it.
So true! I got the cheapest mirrorless canon (m200) but coupled with the 56mm f1.4 sigma lens i can catch amazing shots. Its like a good grinder for an espresso machine, its a must.
I loved the results from my full frame versus my APSC sensor also the color rendering was better skin tones looked thousand times better I love all my lenses they all have a unique way of rendering but I think the sensors just as important as well as how the camera processes noise
I started my club photography career with a canon m50ii with kit lens. Took me far to paid portrait shoots and a lot of banger travel photos although it requires a lot of dedication to master shooting in manual and knowing what to do during the shoot and post production. Kit lens definitely can create great pictures! I recently upgraded and my photos improve tenfold but it wouldn't have improved that much without the skill behind it 😁
If you're using a Sony Crop Sensor, do a 1.53x to the aperture (fX) and focal length (Xmm) to get the full body equivalent. When you have a 30mm f1.4, that's really a 46mm f2.14 on a full body. So when you have a 50mm f5 what you really have is a 77mm f7.65 meaning you have a wide focus range and it makes blurring/bokeh less impactful at close range.
Ive recently start taking photos of cars n I’ve learnt so much from watching your videos I’m currently running a 700D with a 18-55mm n definitely gonna look at upgrading lenses but for my first weeks of photos I’d like to say with some editing got some banging shots
100% the truth. Way back when I was using my old EOS M I was not satisfied with the image quality. Then I picked up a couple of low aperture primes and was quite shocked at the image quality difference. Then I picked up an L series lens and was properly blown away that my little camera could produce such beautiful images. High quality glass and an older body will do laps around a modern body with crap glass.
My first lens after the 18-55mm kit lens was the canon 50mm 1.4, paired with the 750d, and that lens genuinely ignited my passion for photography. 6 years later and I’ve since upgrade my whole system but it’s still one of my favourite lenses.
True. Picked up a 50mm that goes down to 1.8. Havent stuck it there but its better than a 4.5 widest w/the kit lens. Still learning but this one feels worlds better for what i want to capture
Quality glass over a fancy new body is the way. Luckily it did not take me long to figure it out. First camera was an Olympus E-M5 Mark II with the 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens but saved for an Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro and man I was absolutely blown away by the quality of the images. I’ve always tried to tell this to other photographers that upgrade their camera bodies but still use that camera’s kit lens. Pick a camera system you know you’ll be with for a long time, get you a cheap camera body for it, and spend the rest of your money from your set budget on a quality lens and you’re good.
Good job :') I love you for this, you were so sweet and explained it well, you related and expressed your experience with that feeling, rather than telling them how it is just out of pocket.
I have a lumix g7 and just the cheap little lenses I bought made my work look so much better I haven’t touched the kit lens in some time and I didn’t even buy over the top lenses I got a meike 25Mm which runs at about $80, forasy 35 mm ran me less than $40, the most expensive one I got was a sigma 60mm and all of those lenses brought new light to my camera
There is so much more to photography then how fast your lense and if it is variable aperture young grasshopper. Composition, light it all makes for the magic sauce. Less is more with everything in life.
The sigma 56mm was the game changer for me 👌 use to take car photos with my old canon eos 550D with kit lens's which was good but I could just never get the photos I had in my head. Changed to mirrorless A6400 around 2 years ago and got a few sigma lens's. Instant level up
its better for beginners to learn using prime lenses. composing the distance of yourself to the subject - technique will go a long way without compromising the quality of your output.
You're completely right. I've got a D90 with a stupid simple 189 euro 35mil prime 1.8. The lens makes the difference. Hope to own a Leica some day, I think their lenses are mesmerizing.
It's weird, I'm not interested in his subject matter and don't like any of his photos but as an occasion photographer I admire his passion and he seems like a great bloke 👍
What he is saying is true. But, for me currently it is the opposite. In my years of doing photography sometimes the body can also be the problem. For example I shoot with a Canon 60d and a Panasonic GH5 w/ a Sigma 18-35. Both take phenomenal photos with that lens but you can see a difference in shooting from both. But I will be using the Sony A7IV very soon and probably forever. So for me, problem solved.
The 30mm f1.4 is the cheapest lens I own but honestly might be my favorite. It’s so crisp and well built. It cost me like 200 bucks. Idk what it is about it. But it rocks.
That’s awesome that you took the time to explain to them the details of photography without sounding condescending or impatient. Sometimes these things take time to learn and hopefully they will now empower other future photographers 💯
It’s always a pleasure to be able to share what I know with others 😊 that the main reason why I started all of this, just to make learning photography a little easier 🫶
Thats right and sometimes it needs calm people like him they share the knowledge to others. He gave him an inspiration to His next step in photography.
Yeah it’s just unfortunate that he was wrong.
@@V0idFacehow was he wrong?
This just normal behavior blud lmao. Why would he sound impatient or something talking bout the things he's passionate about?
When you said “every camera body is good” you earned my respect. It’s really cool seeing you take these folks under you wing and show them something that blows their mind. However simple. It’s really cool. Props!
I shoot with canon rp, Canon R and nikon d750 on my work
And my personal camera is an old fckn Canon 1200d with 50mm 1.8 lens
And it films sooo good. I like the colors and it's a killer with this lens. It only costs around 100 bucks and lens coasts around 120 bucks, and this is a killer for this price
It’s all going to depend on what you are shooting.
it's so true... Lenses really matter not the body..
Yes, and no depends when you get to like the exact little things and types of niche photography the body does matter but that’s usually niche photography types
@@Hellothis12157knbhb well obviously, but the body still doesnt matter, unless you're some international pro that needs the absolute best like the r3, then the body does not matter
@@tridinh1011 well ofc or you love a hobby to much.
For video I’d say the body matters. Everything from color science to log formats (basically like raw but for video). Aliasing, and just overall image quality can be very noticeable on a cheaper camera vs a more expensive
Different context different problem.
You don't really care about lens when you are taking landscape as long as you get rid of vignette, distortion, and it's sharp across at f8 or f11 (even if it's not sharp you can composite multiple pictures). Most modern kit lens can do this (except you Sony pancake 1650)
Portrait is a different matter, out of focus background becomes a tool to use, so you need fast lens so you can make different composition to make the portrait more flattering.
If you're shooting still cars, you can do focus stacking to get similar effect to fast lens. This also can lower the iso noise.
This would be a great metaphor. The body as who you start as, what people made you, and your body. The lens is the perspective you build for yourself.
Yeah, not that deep.
@@levirhodes6450 it's a matter of perspective, the definition of ignorance is not being able to appreciate other's
Nice perspective
@@levirhodes6450I guess you just exist.
@@zanderthelegend8225 yeah, not that deep champ.
As a beginner, I think it’s part of what inspires you to continue to shoot & learn… a nice lens is easier to get great keeper shots but you can get great shots with any lens/camera. As a musician, I like to relate it to a guitar…. can you learn to play on a cheap guitar? Yes, but you will probably play longer if you have a nice setup.
Kit lenses are underrated as hell, compact, light and decent zoom range.
Recently took my kit lens out on a hike. I was impressed by the photos! I hadn't really used it since I bought my camera, about a year and a half, so I think just a bit of experience really helped out. Gotta love how small the kit lens is, too!
When I started in 9 yrs ago with a kit lens there was a problem. Absolutely no understanding about how to use the camera nor proper way to use the kit lens. Then I bought a 50mm f1.8, sigma 70-200mm f2.8, sigma 50-100mm f1.8 art. Learned some things. Went back to my kit lens and took some good photos. However as we all know the best portraits come from good glass.
Buy a prime lens. Use both the prime lens and your kit lens. Kit lenses aren't always garbage but there are just some things you can't do with them. If you WANT an out of focus background there's no work around. Get a nifty fifty or another fast lens
Right? Some of my best shots were taken with the Canon 18-55. Better glass will open up more photo opportunities for you, especially in challenging situations, but you've still got to possess the technical knowledge, drive, and instinct to take advantage of them.
Kit glass is very limited in what it can do well.
18-55 mm is one of the best and the most versatile lenses out there. This lens has so many capabilities.
Its not about the focal length, listen,18-55 is awesome.. But Its the aperture that holding u back 3.5 - 5.6 is sucked... I wish i can save enough money to get 30ish to 80ish mm with f 1.8 so low light conditions doesn't bother me anymore and i can take a better portrait photos..
@@hushnii have an 18-55 kitlens that goes from f/2.8 to f/4.0
That focal range is great but the kit lenses are usually made cheaply with not great glass and coatings
@@Narwal-oj1pr for beginners its fine,
The kit 18-135mm is better. Better build, glass, and reach. But it's rare. I have the 10-18mm, 18-135mm, and the 55--250mm for my apsc. (Also 24mm f2.8, and the 500 1.8) this covers 90% of shootings.
Other lenses I use less often; I have....135 f2, 100-600 5.6, and other fast glass that is all manual. The live in a case. They come out when needed, bit are left behind on most outings.
Remember. Composition is king. Bodies and lenses are just tools for what you can create. They may limit a certain vision, but you can get pretty damn close if you just focus on composition and technique.
It’s the person behind the camera nine times out of ten
any camera works just frame the cars
Yeah I have seen his pics, my old as Sony experia premium from took better shots tham him.. he just suck.
@SkyevoIIt's like having a huge tool kit spending more makes sure you have the perfect tool for the job but you need experience and knowledge how to use it fully
It's the lense dude
So would my M50 with like the sigma 30mm f1.4 take photos just as good? I was thinking about selling the body and getting something like an R10
Wait until this guy discovers the power of controlled lighting and set design
I’m pretty sure he set his camera to P mode, cuz we all know that P stands for professional
@@Keksdose2kyeah. It's like the R gear on your car. Means "rocket" or "race" we all know that
Right? Creates less work in post.
Wait until he discovers Photoshop
Actually the kit lens is fine to use if you have the right lighting and space to use it on a subject… hence the Aperture range and focal length… “hey all cameras are fine it’s your lens that sucks…get a new lens like mine and you’ll instantly be a better photographer!” Wrong… learn every limitations that your camera and lens has and how to maximize the composition with what you have despite their limitations… basically if you learn what it takes to get a great image from a Polaroid point and shoot fixed lens and fixed flash then you can get a great image using anything… learn photography as a whole and you will shoot circles around those people who need the next great camera body and the best and fastest wide open lenses!
I agree. Firstly, most lenses aren’t their sharpest at their widest aperture. Also, depending on your subject you may not want a wide aperture. There’s probably other qualities with certain kit lenses that beginning photographers don’t like such as distortion, bokeh shape, flares, or lack of sharpness either all around or at the corners.
@@dkd123sharpness is irrelevant. Wide open such as 1.4 and f/2 give a look that is much better than a lens that’s wide open at 4 or 5.6. The blurry background is what a lot of people want when they buy a real camera
@@dkd123dude that’s literally only for film lenses and third party garbage, or maybe if you’re at 0.95 with a noctillux but at that point sharpness doesn’t matter
@@Drpftnst that is not true, it depends what you are shooting. Doing street photography on a 2.8 or a 1.4 close up will be a nightmare. You will lose focus all the time, it won‘t make fun and also your pictures will be crap. As a wedding photographer im rarely using an apeture under f4 in a daylight scenario. Bad photographers always want that depth of field, but, if that defines a good picture for you, you are just that, a bad photgrapher.
@@bigboyballer4204 I shoot street photography all the time with my 50mm 1.2. isn't a problem if you have a good AF system and a good lens
Bro out here giving bad advice. If you're not happy with your photos, buying a new lens is just a band-aid solution. Get better as a photographer with a kit lens before you spend money. A good photographer can use a kit lens and get better photos than an amateur with the best lens in the world.
In the beginning I loved my kit lens, and was proud of what I came out with. But the more I shot with it the more imperfections I saw, and what I know can be achieved I wasn’t reaching. If they are dissatisfied with where their photos are now, then they are growing as a photographer. His advice is spot on.
@@joshuawalker6863"in the beginning I loved my kit lens" and there's the difference between you and him. He said "why does this camera suck" with his kit lens and the answer is it didn't, but neither did his lens. He was taking bad photos then he bought a shallow depth of field lens and band-aided his photos.
You can tell this because his advice is to buy a lens with a low aperture and that will make them happy with the photos they take. Shallow depth of field is a band-aid fix to bad composition. It's bad advice. It's not like he's suggesting they need the lower light capability, they're in a brightly lit car show. There's plenty of light.
@@danielarmstrong2144I kinda get it I am a beginner and my friends suggested to directly get a a7c and ditch the kit lens for a 28/f2 and yea my skill suck but I can just bokeh my way out of it… until I got a zoom lens 24-70 f4 suddenly I can’t f2 my way out of shitty lighting and it force me to think
But he is also right don’t be like me forcing to buy a expensive body then have no budget to get a good lens cause logically yea u can just buy a better lens later
but when u already spend so much and then getting mediocre result you will think “another purchase to make my photo look good ? what is this bullshit?”instead of forcing yourself to learn better skills cause your brain directly want result
If u buy a balance of both you have no more reason or things to blame except your skill
forcing you to to learn
@@Sathornetfire yup, that's why _"buy better gear"_ will always be a bad advice for beginners, when camera + kit lens from the past decade are fully capable of taking great pictures.
If someone is unsatisfied with their picture, it's most often not a gear issue but is unironically a skill issue.
Photographer matters more than anything else. The most important thing is to focus on that first
Im partially agree with your point, it works as a charm especially for beginners starting out from their kit lens. However, actually our inner knowledge, experience, creativity .. are what matters most, many pros can get away easily even with wide focal length small aperture open and still produce great image with emphasis on the main subject, telling the story without the need to blur out all the background
Yes I love a lot of the photos I've taken with a kit lens
Sometimes it can be both depending on your intentions. An APSC overheats faster in a cage when doing underwater photography, you can adjust the heating on a Sony a7 camera to prevent it from shutting off. Older cameras can't shoot Log and each manufacturer has their own version of Log that's intended for flat imaging. Sony (S-log) Nikon (N-log) Canon (clog). Zooms has become just as good as primes and stops the need of getting multiple focal ranges. I would recommend that you check out each camera's limitations and capabilities. Some has a color profile that's more favorable towards blue (Nikon) with another is green (Sony), or even warmer tones (Canon). You can fix it but just something to be aware of. There's a limitation on the amount of lenses available and warnings if you intend to use a logi chip adapter to use lenses from other brands.
He is just talking about photos, nearly every recent camera is good enough for 99percent of photography. The lens is the most important part
@@sold-productions No, I understood that. Some people likes the look that a vintage camera or lens gives. Sometimes, you need the proprietary body to fully utilize the lens or else one of two things will happen: can't get the proper image or it will say "err". I just wanted to share other perspectives that were not covered.
Agreed. I never care what happens to my camera body but the lenses are the most important to me. However, technique and style are also essential. I’ve seen people make magic with the basics
2.8 aperture is amazing for portraits. I use a Sony a7r4 with a Tamron. Absolute amazing photos everytime
The result might still be nice with a narrow angle.
I have the Tamron 20mm and I hate it, there’s so much distortion I don’t think I could get a straight line if my life depended on it. I need to pick up some more lenses so I can see how they compare.
@@daesong1378 can't you just remove the distortion?
@@liam4184 if I use the lens correction in Lightroom it causes the image to be stretched out in obvious ways, it’s kind of okay for natural landscape shots. Doesn’t work that well for architectural stuff and for anything with people. I can also crop the image more to try to deal with that but since it’s a cheap glass, the optical resolution is not that great so the cropped image isn’t good.
Hey, same here! Except I have a Sony A7iii. Im trying to pivot into videography with it now
The sigma 30 is such a powerhouse. Insanely sharp for less than $400. My favorite lens I’ve ever had.
I bought a Canon 750D just a few weeks ago, 3 lenses included. 18-55mm, 28-80mm and 55-250mm.sold the first two, kept the 250mm and bought right away a 50mm 1.8, 24mm 2.8, and a vintage pentacon 50mm 1.8...out of all lenses, the pentacon its the best one.. Has a special space in my heart ☺️
I have a 760D 👀
I bought it naked because I had a 400D since 2010 and I'm still using my 35mm f2.0.
@@KahruSuomiPerkele its pretty much the same camera, just a minor difference which I can't even remember any more 😂 I think it might be the round dial instead of arrows. Which 35mm have you got?
the raw photos that you take kinda already looks good tbh 🤷🏼♂️ mans skilled 🔥🔥
Thanks so much! Really appreciate it 😊🙏🤝
Nah man it's the fact my body can't bloody focus
get a manual lens and do it yourself. autofocus has it's uses, but if you're at an event or something and taking your time anyway, use that time to nail focus and composition.
Also keep in mind all lenses don't autofocus equally. I have an 85mm prime and it sucks at focusing and focus hunts like crazy in low light, and I have an expensive camera body that preforms way better with other lenses so some lenses are just different. Some lenses have better autofocus for video, some for photos, some have different motor technology
I love when people get together and talk about something they enjoy and one person helps another out. Great stuff, and I learned that I need a low aperture lens for my camera. ❤
The main secret is you don't need as low aperture as possible.
You need to understand where and when you will use your camera. Because a low aperture lens doesn't give you any creativity, vision, and understanding.
But it’ll take some money from your purse.
Couldn't agree more. I was using a kit lens for my earlier photos, and they were just okay. Picked up a Sigma 56mm f/1.4 and my photos are a hundred times better. The lens you use makes a HUGE difference.
i will gladly support that. and most important is the person take photos. i seen plenty of photographer with $$$ camera but the photos bad. angle,time,subject is how your potray your picture. trust me. beginner camera can rivals professional camera if you know what to do. yes it slow camera,hard to use compare to expensive camera. but if you take 10 photos. there will be only one you need to pick. just take a lot of picture and find the nice one and learn from that. then test the limits of your camera. if you reach the limits of your camera. then it will be worth to change your gears
Don't let him fool you. 95% of a good photo is the subject, composition, color, balance, etc. The other 5% is the body and lens (lens being more important as mentioned).
Can only polish a piece of shit so much, biggest % is in the lense to get something workable first
Was shocked at what he said to get a better lens because I completely disagree; kit lens are good! It's just a skill issue if you cant make bangers without relying on some bokeh.
It's good that a majority of the comments disagree and it's a matter of how you take the photo regardless of a fast lens or not. Because what sense is a fast lens if you can't even tell a good story unless you only shoot portraits
@@dmgg8917a good lens does not only shine through its bokeh, its the sharpness of the lens, which is often lacking on the ends of a zoom, chromatic aberrations, vignetting, morphed edges etc. I agree that you should learn to use what you have but a good lens is more than its bokeh. You can see that many of his pictures sre not taken with a 1.4 aperture, so there is obviously more to it.
Agreed. Almost every photographer uses editing to make their images pop and stand out. I remember in high school I decided that I'd rather take a bomb photo with the camera and lens than to edit a photo to be bomb. This meant that I'd have to use EVERYTHING to get that bomb photo first. A great photographer should be able to do that without having to rely on post-edits like this guy. His previous images looked basic before he edited them.
@@tigersdogginyall6728wrong.
I love it when other photographers ask me for advice, especially beginners. I’m still learning newer stuff everyday and I never hesitate to share my knowledge with newcomers. Photography is art and there should be zero gatekeeping in photography.
I got like a decent 15 year old canon but it still takes really good photos
I am still using canon 7d
For entry level I absolutely agree. Lens + edition skills is way better than a camera body. But as you get used to the limitations of your camera, you start to notice some aspects that may be cutting your potential. I have a canon200d, and I've noticed some lack of definition under some conditions, the poor HDR (which most of the time isn't a problem, I just take darker picture and increase the shadows in editing). But still, I agree lens and editing skills do compensate those camera limitations. Most of the time you can go around it
It depends what you’re taking photos of, this is great information for beginners in this video. Camera bodies are important but yes the lens is the most crucial part of the look of an image. You can use the kit lens for a lot of things and get a lot out of it if you know what you’re doing - they’re versatile and cheap to make so they’re great to start out on and even use for casual shooting. You can use them professionally but it can be more difficult to achieve the look you want. A blurred background does look nice and the full frame look with a wide aperture is desirable but of course it has its place and there are a variety of different ways to approach an image. The most important thing is shooting with your heart and mind, showing personality in your photos - when that’s married with a good level of technical understanding and a good feel for your kit, you can take off. Equipment nowadays is so good that any beginner has the potential to progress very quickly. It may very well be a dying way to make money but it enriches your life and makes you see things differently.
I mean..it’s not even the aperture in this scenario (from those distances) that make the difference. It’s the perspective. That’s the “lens”. The taste. Which varies wildly between different people as they become better at photography over time.
A great photographer can make a kit lens shine. Tools matter but ultimately experience helps nail a shot.
you missed the point a bit. sure you are correct but he is saying instead of thinking "my camera is not good enough" think instead "my lens is not good enough" people get caught thinking they need the newest camera body when a dslr from 2011 is still good enough for pro work
@@darthsnarf and even in that context he's still wrong. Their kit lens would be perfectly capable of taking great picture of cars in this well lit environment, and yet he's pushing them to waste money on faster lenses before polishing their craft. All his advice would lead to is covering the beginner's poor skill behind pretty blurry backgrounds.
It's just bad advice, _"get better gear"_ doesn't work 9/10 times. Good image with impeccable composition having lens imperfections would still be preferable over poor image with perfect pixel sharpness and dreamy bokeh.
You date the body marry your lens always remember that
A good Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Rodenstock, Schneider lens will give you incredible pictures. Even old Leica R lenses are still stunning. The main reason is not sharpness, but Microcontrast, colours and general rendering
Next month I'll buy the sigma 56mm f1.4 for my sony zve10 🙏 can't wait
Great choice! I have the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 and I LOVE it.
@@raynjpg I changed my mind and ordered it abit earlier. Got it 3 days ago and compared w the zve10 it truly is a beast 🫶
I just got mine for my fujifilm. So far, it's great
@@S3brandon Fujifilm are amazing. My roomie at my old school had one compared with a couple lenses. It's him that shot my pfp
@@Z900_WizzCombined is the word you're looking for, not compared btw mate 😊
I think what some people get wrong here is that kit lenses themselves are not necessarily bad. What they do is, the set strong limitations regarding your aperture selection. But also they allow amateurs to zoom instead of moving closer or farther away which often results in beginners standing as close as possible to the subject while realizing that it only fits into the frame if they zoom out.
What they will end with are "smartphone pictures" in the range of 24mm, F3.5 often leading to frustration why they spent so much money on a camera that doesn't make the pictures look like they expected.
Not saying that kit-lenses may never work, but the very first thing in photography for me was to really understand! which parameter does what. What dies 35 mm and what does 85mm mean? Why can you make the background blurry/in-focus? For all these things you need flexibility (different lenses, primes, telezooms...) Then, you can make great photos even! with kit-lenses.
$380 lens makes a difference. Sigma is quality, crystal clear and smooth
For sure, ever since I bought my Sony a 6000 I hated my kit Len I thought the camera had really bad quality, but then I purchased the Sigma 35, 1.4 art lens and that’s when the table flipped.
Looks I need to upgrade from my kit lens too. Any recommendations? I have a full frame camera
@@Udayveer_Singhf your camera canon go to lens L series.
if your camera sony go to lens sony FE GM.
alternatif sigma lens DG for fullframe
With my Sigma 56mm f1.4 i have a lot of focus breathing... but the image quality is insane.
But if you don't understand the craft, it'll still look like garbage.
Your photography is so inspiring. Learning so much from your content. 💓
Definitely some decent advice. The first thing I did to level up my photography was pick up a vintage 50mm f1.8 just being a prime lens helps so much
But I think leaning the art side of things is more important but definitely a great first step is picking up a prime lens
Yeah absolutely agree 😊 the guy I was giving the advice to had already built an amazing foundation of photography skills but wondered what gear he should be upgrading. You definitely have to build that foundation first before investing in more gear 🫶
Respect for helping out and explaining it all!! That’s awesome
SIGMA LENS
Haha yep 😂 great lenses, highly recommend 👍
What he's not mentioning is the crucial role of editing and composition in achieving a professional look. Simply having a good lens and taking random pictures isn't enough; lacking the necessary skills can hinder the outcome. Surprisingly, some individuals using smartphones produce better pictures than those using high-end cameras due to their adeptness in composition and editing, which significantly enhances the overall quality of the image.
Additionally, there's the whole topic of lighting.
"the single most important component of the camera is the twelve inches behind it" - Ansel Adams. Hey yourself right before worrying about the camera and lense
Yep, this. Practice, practice and then a bit more Practice. The body or the lens probably isn't the limiting factor.
Yeah every body is good! But during my photography journey, aps-c to FF was definitely one of the biggest leaps in quality. Mainly 3 factors: better low light performance (less noise at higher iso), larger dynamic range, higher quality lens collection. Other minor differences would be in body stabilization, which most aps-c cameras lack, and 1/8000 shutter speed. If you shoot in bright daylight, the differences will be minimal, but if you like shooting at night like me, go for Full Frame!
Also, you can also try buying FF lens first and test it out on apsc bodies. FF lenses tend to have larger diameter so they lead to better bokeh rendition, and you are only using the center section of the lens, so whatever FF lens you are using, the whole image will be sharp.
It’s a mix of everything. Your feeling for perspectives, camera, lens, good feeling for colors shadows and lights at editing and so on…
It’s a constant process of learning 😌
Depends on what you're shooting, I did some cool shots with a basic 18-55 lens. Of course if you're going to take pictures of a cars or doing portraits it's going to suck a little bit because you'll have no subject/background separation. Go outdoor and you'll see that a f1.4 wont be that useful, because you'll probably want to stay between f5.0 to f8.0
Sometimes the root cause of bad photos is still the body and more specifically hands
Some kits use a soft plastic lens. The 18-140 glass is twice the sharpness, 16-50 2.8 is three times sharper. For under $200 used.
When I did photography as a hobby as a teenager, I always used to see people with more money than sense with 5DS Mk2s (the most expensive at the time), stock lenses, and not knowing how to get a good picture. I had a 350D and always planned to upgrade the body, but ended up keeping it for years and just upgrading the lenses. There was never a need for more than 8MP since none of us are looking at our photos at such a resolution anyway.
That’s amazing man! Love that story and it a prime example of how far you can push a camera body with the right lenses 😊👍
@@lifethroughoptics That’s the thing man, and it’s not even about the lenses. There’s beauty in life everywhere, we just have to learn how to capture it. I think people forgot what photography used to be about in the first place: capturing a moment in time. That’s all photography is, we’re supposed to capture a moment in time that’ll never occur again. So it doesn’t matter what body or how much it costs, the moment in time is all that matters~
I see this all the time with film photographers too! They kept asking what camera body is good but truth is its the lens system is what matters. Reason why I use mainly Minolta and Canon lenses now when I'm shooting film is the price and absurd gorgeous quality you get from these old lenses
Well it also depends on how you use the lens 😉
you dont need a low aperture for good pictures. most of my favourite images and most well known photographers shoot at f8 or higher. what matters most about a lens is colour representation, fringing and sharpness.
It's 50% lens 20% body 30% editing
And the guy who holds the camera????
@@daniel-dimitrioss.m4608100%
100% correct. Felt and found out the same reason after I got my mirrorless camera. Then bought a 50mm prime lens for my first glass aside from the 24-105mm and definitely saw the difference. That aperture helps a lot.
It is also the body... Shooting with APS-C in low light will have noticeable noise in pictures, while with Full frame you can get clean pics without the noise with less light. Colors and dynamic range is also usually better in full frame. Also some bodies have stabilization while others don't. No in body stabilization will easily cause fuzzy photos shot from hand.
I wish somebody told me this when I started it would save me so much strugle, thanks for helping new guys and not gatekeeping
True shit man once I invest into 3lens 30 50 and 85 my photography and ideals changed
I tried this exact setup at a convention recently: and oh boy was it refreshing. I normally use a Tamron 17-70 f2.8, and I absolutely adore that lens, but being able to drop down all the way to f1.4 and simply understanding the focal lengths of the lens really allowed me to focus on framing a good shot, one that was wide enough to allow for corrections rather than just zooming the shot into view.
Absolutely blown away by what Sigma has done with the 30mm f1.4, I’m looking forward to picking up their 16mm and taking that for a spin.
Its always about the lense (and lighting), it brings character to images
It ain't the lens, it's the photographer.
Its cool helping out fellow photographers.
At the end of the day we all need to evolve with our chosen craft.
This is what we need!!! Photographer's who actually explain photography, what all the terms and numbers mean!! So many people walking around with Rebels and D3000s and not knowing anything outside of auto mode.
Canon 50mm F/1.8 is an absolute steal. Perfect primelens for beginners! If u have more budget get the F/1.4, also very good lens!
“Limitations are the breeding grounds of creativity”
I grew up with a sony a6000 and did many events, real estate photography even print work all on my kit lenses and a few $50 primes. I recently got the Sony a7iii and while I do see a difference in depth of field at lower apertures (due to the lense I have with it) you can produce amazing images from both.
Gear being the problem is only an excuse. Researching the first pinhole camera’s are humbling.
What prime lenses you had?
@@varadgauthankar a 35mm and a 12mm
Also, framing. A lot of people haven’t been taught the basics when it comes to framing, like the rule of thirds and where to place the horizon line
SO PLEASED AND HAPPY' TO SEE YOUR CONTENT GOING FROM 500 VIEWS TO 100K .. GOD BLESS YOU MATE. ❤❤❤
It also depends on how you shoot the subject. I mean, yeah lens matter, but it's not the only factor. As what the other comment said, if you know your body and lens limitations, you should know how to overcome it and bring the best of that. Upgrade only if you really need it. I still use 15-55 kit lens from my fuji package, and I'm quite happy with it, as long as you know what are you doing with it.
This is probably mentioned in another one of his videos but polarizing filters too! Holy cow do they make a difference when shooting cars.
Amazing advice I use an a6000 and using a lens other than the kit has made a world of difference.
So true! I got the cheapest mirrorless canon (m200) but coupled with the 56mm f1.4 sigma lens i can catch amazing shots. Its like a good grinder for an espresso machine, its a must.
I really like my kit lens from Fujifilm , the 18-55 is extremely good!
I loved the results from my full frame versus my APSC sensor also the color rendering was better skin tones looked thousand times better I love all my lenses they all have a unique way of rendering but I think the sensors just as important as well as how the camera processes noise
I started my club photography career with a canon m50ii with kit lens. Took me far to paid portrait shoots and a lot of banger travel photos although it requires a lot of dedication to master shooting in manual and knowing what to do during the shoot and post production. Kit lens definitely can create great pictures! I recently upgraded and my photos improve tenfold but it wouldn't have improved that much without the skill behind it 😁
I love these videos
If you're using a Sony Crop Sensor, do a 1.53x to the aperture (fX) and focal length (Xmm) to get the full body equivalent. When you have a 30mm f1.4, that's really a 46mm f2.14 on a full body.
So when you have a 50mm f5 what you really have is a 77mm f7.65 meaning you have a wide focus range and it makes blurring/bokeh less impactful at close range.
Ive recently start taking photos of cars n I’ve learnt so much from watching your videos I’m currently running a 700D with a 18-55mm n definitely gonna look at upgrading lenses but for my first weeks of photos I’d like to say with some editing got some banging shots
100% the truth. Way back when I was using my old EOS M I was not satisfied with the image quality. Then I picked up a couple of low aperture primes and was quite shocked at the image quality difference. Then I picked up an L series lens and was properly blown away that my little camera could produce such beautiful images.
High quality glass and an older body will do laps around a modern body with crap glass.
My first lens after the 18-55mm kit lens was the canon 50mm 1.4, paired with the 750d, and that lens genuinely ignited my passion for photography. 6 years later and I’ve since upgrade my whole system but it’s still one of my favourite lenses.
True. Picked up a 50mm that goes down to 1.8. Havent stuck it there but its better than a 4.5 widest w/the kit lens. Still learning but this one feels worlds better for what i want to capture
30mm on a cropfactor of 1,5 equals a 45mm on a full frame camera so 50 1,8 should be fine in this case for fullframe
Quality glass over a fancy new body is the way. Luckily it did not take me long to figure it out. First camera was an Olympus E-M5 Mark II with the 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens but saved for an Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro and man I was absolutely blown away by the quality of the images.
I’ve always tried to tell this to other photographers that upgrade their camera bodies but still use that camera’s kit lens.
Pick a camera system you know you’ll be with for a long time, get you a cheap camera body for it, and spend the rest of your money from your set budget on a quality lens and you’re good.
Good job :') I love you for this, you were so sweet and explained it well, you related and expressed your experience with that feeling, rather than telling them how it is just out of pocket.
Photography is light and composition
I have a lumix g7 and just the cheap little lenses I bought made my work look so much better I haven’t touched the kit lens in some time and I didn’t even buy over the top lenses I got a meike 25Mm which runs at about $80, forasy 35 mm ran me less than $40, the most expensive one I got was a sigma 60mm and all of those lenses brought new light to my camera
Man I love these videos and the atmosphere
There is so much more to photography then how fast your lense and if it is variable aperture young grasshopper. Composition, light it all makes for the magic sauce. Less is more with everything in life.
Man this is super nice of you
Underrated asf
The sigma 56mm was the game changer for me 👌 use to take car photos with my old canon eos 550D with kit lens's which was good but I could just never get the photos I had in my head. Changed to mirrorless A6400 around 2 years ago and got a few sigma lens's. Instant level up
Not that the photos were bad out of the canon mind you. That same 18-55 kit lens paired with 55-200. Took photos with them for years
its better for beginners to learn using prime lenses. composing the distance of yourself to the subject - technique will go a long way without compromising the quality of your output.
You're completely right. I've got a D90 with a stupid simple 189 euro 35mil prime 1.8. The lens makes the difference. Hope to own a Leica some day, I think their lenses are mesmerizing.
That's the goal. To own a Leica one day 😅.
I too would like one, for medium format film photography
It's weird, I'm not interested in his subject matter and don't like any of his photos but as an occasion photographer I admire his passion and he seems like a great bloke 👍
Really useful tip. I appreciate it.
Got the same exact lens 🔥🙌and yes, it DOES make all the difference!! Still rocking with a Sony a6000
And that’s why I love the photography community
Thanks for the easy explanation for me a newbie
Those photo are absolutely fantastic keep up the good work man
I 100% was agree with this. I have the same setup
Great to hear! lenses make such a huge difference after you have built a solid foundation 😊👍
What he is saying is true. But, for me currently it is the opposite. In my years of doing photography sometimes the body can also be the problem. For example I shoot with a Canon 60d and a Panasonic GH5 w/ a Sigma 18-35. Both take phenomenal photos with that lens but you can see a difference in shooting from both. But I will be using the Sony A7IV very soon and probably forever. So for me, problem solved.
My god this guys seems so humble
As someone who is still on an a6000 but been shooting with a sigma 30mm 1.4 for years, this is a great reminder.
The 30mm f1.4 is the cheapest lens I own but honestly might be my favorite. It’s so crisp and well built. It cost me like 200 bucks. Idk what it is about it. But it rocks.