More people with an interest in photography are getting into full frame sensors. Prices have been going down and making it more affordable for the average person and this is great though it doesn’t mean they are cheap, just cheaper. Still, many are slapping down the cash for these cameras and at times the glass to go with them. There are some advantages to it and it seems that maybe there are people feeling they can ride the idea that since they have a full frame sensor it automatically makes their work better. I only base this on those I have spoken with, overheard or the way some talk in online communities and when I look at their work I wonder, “Why did they spend the money?” This doesn’t apply to everybody and I’m not trying to say the photos others take are bad but they aren’t exactly that great either, at least not good enough to justify spending the money they have on the camera they use let alone the glass they got too. It’s their choice though and it’s not like it affects me.
With that said, I myself, am not ashamed that when it comes to digital photography, I shoot on a crop frame sensor. Nothing about this makes me feel bad and I honestly have no intent to make the move to full frame anytime soon. This is not to say that I don’t shoot full frame because I do, at least when I shoot film photography. As I shoot Sony when it comes to digital I can then shoot Minolta film cameras and use the same A-mount lenses. When I do I can see a difference in how things look but to me it’s not that big of a difference and plays little in my work and how I shoot. Sure there’s all sorts of arguments about full frame and what it can do and how it’s better this or that but it’s not all entirely true, especially as the technology advances.
I could go on but I’m not here to rant. Only here to say there is no shame in my mind for not shooting on a full frame sensor and that others should feel the same. If you have the money to spend and you want to go full frame then do it. As for me, I like what I have and don’t need the latest technology in any part of my life, cell phones included.
Speaking of no shame, I also have no shame in my choice of cameras, that being Sony and Minolta. I also have no shame in my love of focus free cheap film cameras and I have no shame in myself so the photo above is a self-portrait.
The term “professional photographer” seems to get thrown around a lot these days. People are more focused on title rather than the experience. Kind of like how society puts more into ones job title, or social status and the phone or car they drive. The art of the photograph I feel is being lost sometimes for the sake of an empty title in life.
It used to be one would work hard for years perfecting their skills and eventually becoming a professional. Many others took amazing photographs and never announced they were a professional let alone a photographer at all. Take Vivian Maier for instance, no one ever knew of her work as a photographer just that she did some traveling and worked her life as a nanny. Very private she spent her days off walking, exploring and taking pictures but nothing more was known let alone seen of her work. Luckily it was discovered and brought to light and is worth looking into. The point is she never gloated about her photos but clearly she had an eye for what she did. Her pictures were for her pure enjoyment and nothing more and it seems there are more people leaving that behind. They get a camera and take some pictures and the moment they take pictures for someone else, whether paid or not, they want to add “professional photographer” to their title in life. I’ve met people who have cooked for two years yet call themselves “professional chefs”. It just seems sad to me.
Even a service or group like Nikon Professional Services in my mind does not make one a professional. I know a hand full of people who got membership despite not actually owning two or more professional Nikon bodies let alone the lenses required. They certainly do not work full time as a photographer nor have it as their sole or primary means of income so what makes them actually a professional? I don’t know but I also was told one needs to keep an updated inventory of body and lenses thus staying current with Nikon gear to maintain being a professional in their eyes. I understand that as a true professional keeping ones gear up to date is part of the expense of being a professional but it seems to me more like a sale gimmick rather than an endowment of professionalism. I mean so many great photographers past and present have shot some of their best stuff on old equipment.
The more “professional” work I see the less I think it compares to those who shoot for their own enjoyment who are not trying to impress others or gloat about the photos they take. And while not against the digital age and the technology we have, it is sad to know so much is being done in post that could have been done with the camera if said professionals truly were the title they placed upon themselves. I guess using a title sounds good and drinking from a camera lens mug makes others feel more like they are what they claim to be which is easier than admitting they have little understanding of the art of photography let alone its history.