going pro w/ 20D?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Hey folks,

I'm in the process of making a huge career change, going from Computer
Programming to Photography (actually Photgraphy was my original career
many years ago, so I'm returning to my roots).

I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
something like a 1Ds MarkII?

Thanks,
Ron
17 answers Last reply
More about going
  1. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Ron Rice wrote:

    > Hey folks,
    >
    > I'm in the process of making a huge career change, going from Computer
    > Programming to Photography (actually Photgraphy was my original career
    > many years ago, so I'm returning to my roots).
    >
    > I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    > various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    > etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    > professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    > something like a 1Ds MarkII?


    Stock: maybe, but Medium Format would be better
    Studio: but that depends on WHAT? you're doing in WHAT kind
    of studio for WHAT kind of customer. Again, Med Fmt
    is prob a requirement and the 20D could be used in
    many situations as well
    Events: Yes, definitely (sports, social gatherings, concerts). For
    classical music, singing, etc, a "quiet" camera such as
    a rangefinder would be preferable. Weddings demand both Med Fmt
    and 35mm/digital depending on the package offered.
    Fine Art: Medium or Large format.

    You should perhaps "apprentice" for a bit to find your way.

    MO.

    Cheers,
    Alan

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
  2. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    On 29 Nov 2004 11:31:12 -0800, ron.rice@gmail.com (Ron Rice) wrote:

    >Hey folks,
    >
    >I'm in the process of making a huge career change, going from Computer
    >Programming to Photography (actually Photgraphy was my original career
    >many years ago, so I'm returning to my roots).
    >
    >I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    >various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    >etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    >professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    >something like a 1Ds MarkII?

    Quite a few pros use the 20D even for sports, read the forums at
    http://www.sportsshooter.com
  3. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "Ron Rice" wrote:
    > I'm in the process of making a huge career change, going from Computer
    > Programming to Photography (actually Photgraphy was my original career
    > many years ago, so I'm returning to my roots).
    >
    > I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    > various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    > etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    > professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    > something like a 1Ds MarkII?

    Ron,
    it won't be a camera or a set of good lenses which will make you a pro.
    Professionalism is limited by the photographer, not his camera in most
    cases.
    There are some kinds of photography that require "special" equipment, but in
    general I would say it's not your case.

    Some nice ideas/motivation:
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm
    www.kenrockwell.com

    Cheers,
    Tony
  4. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    ron.rice@gmail.com (Ron Rice) wrote in message news:<6e5dfd47.0411291131.27597623@posting.google.com>...

    > I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    > various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    > etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    > professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    > something like a 1Ds MarkII?

    Pro's don't define themselves through the gear they use. If you sell
    pictures for a living, you're pro. Whether those pictures were taken
    with a digital, analogue, high end, entry level does not at all make a
    difference.


    BTW: I think digital SLR are not sufficient for stock photography.
    Typical agencies expect 50 Megapixel and up, which you can currently
    only achieve through digital backs for medium format cameras or high
    end slide scanners.
  5. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Kibo informs me that ron.rice@gmail.com (Ron Rice) stated that:

    >I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    >various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    >etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    >professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    >something like a 1Ds MarkII?

    Yes, a 20D should be fine. Even when you've gotten to the point where
    you hit its limitations & need to consider going for one of the big
    boys, it'll still be able to earn its keep for most purposes.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
  6. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    On 30 Nov 2004 01:26:04 -0800, usenetbox@jet2web.cc (Bernhard Mayer)
    wrote:

    >ron.rice@gmail.com (Ron Rice) wrote in message news:<6e5dfd47.0411291131.27597623@posting.google.com>...
    >
    >> I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    >> various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    >> etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    >> professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    >> something like a 1Ds MarkII?
    >
    >Pro's don't define themselves through the gear they use. If you sell
    >pictures for a living, you're pro. Whether those pictures were taken
    >with a digital, analogue, high end, entry level does not at all make a
    >difference.
    >
    >
    >BTW: I think digital SLR are not sufficient for stock photography.
    >Typical agencies expect 50 Megapixel and up, which you can currently
    >only achieve through digital backs for medium format cameras or high
    >end slide scanners.


    I know lots of pros that use the Canon EOS 1DsMark2 for stock photo
  7. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Everyone,

    Thanks so much for the feedback. Several people commented on the fact
    that the photographer is more important than the gear. I totally
    understand that. I have two Fine Arts degrees--a BA in Photography and
    and MFA in Film. My "personal aesthetic" is well developed. But each
    pro photography niche has its own "minimum standards" of image
    resolution and quality, and this is where I'm lost.

    When I posted my initial message, I was basically wondering if 8
    megapixels, in combination with high-end lenses, would produce image
    resolution and quality that meets industry standards for certain types
    of work. From the various comments, I gather that the 20D is
    well-suited for events and such, but perhaps not for studio, stock and
    fine art. That's useful to know.

    One area I'd really like to explore is Motion Picture Still
    Photography. On every major movie production, there is a still
    photographer who shoots scenes for use in promotions. I know these
    photographers have gone totally digital, but I don't know if 8
    megapixels is enough to meet the needs of motion picture promotions
    departments. Any thoughts?

    Regards,
    Ron
  8. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Ron Rice wrote:


    > One area I'd really like to explore is Motion Picture Still
    > Photography. On every major movie production, there is a still
    > photographer who shoots scenes for use in promotions. I know these
    > photographers have gone totally digital, but I don't know if 8
    > megapixels is enough to meet the needs of motion picture promotions
    > departments. Any thoughts?

    It depends what the end use of the image is. Some of the artwork gets blown up
    quite large, as such resolution does matter. Much of the 'still' camera work
    for a motion picture is also to document the shooting and to provide still shots
    used in the movie itself. There may be several still photographers, a couple or
    a few associated with the production (credited), and others associated with the
    publicists for the talent (not credited unless stock used).

    So depending on the end use of the image (always comes up, eh?) the 20D may fit
    the need handilly and in other cases it will not.

    Find a local production company and ask for guidance ... take one of their
    photogs out to lunch/dinner and pump away.

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
  9. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "PDW" <Spam@zen.co.uk> writes:

    > "Bernhard Mayer" <usenetbox@jet2web.cc> wrote in message
    > news:c06428fe.0411300126.774276d5@posting.google.com...
    >> BTW: I think digital SLR are not sufficient for stock photography.
    >> Typical agencies expect 50 Megapixel and up, which you can currently
    >> only achieve through digital backs for medium format cameras or high
    >> end slide scanners.
    > Bernhard,
    >
    > Could you please point me at at 50 Megapixel back as I can't seem to find
    > one!

    Well, for example http://www.sinar.ch/sinar/kamera/e_html/e_p3.htm talks
    about such resolutions. To quote:

    The Sinar p3 is fully integrated into Sinar modular system. This
    means that the 4x5" coupling frame and digital accessories of the
    Sinar p2 can be attached to the Sinar p3 by means of a conical
    bellows and effortless ease. This also applies to the use of Sinar
    Digital Back Adapters as well as the Sinar Macroscan for greatly
    increased resolution (up to 144 million pixels) and a greater digital
    imaging area (up to 6x6 cm or 2 3/8 x 2 3/8 inches). It also applies
    to the use of a Sinar p3 for chemical photography with roll film
    cassettes and sheet film up to 4x5".

    Dragan


    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
  10. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Bernhard,

    Could you please point me at at 50 Megapixel back as I can't seem to find
    one!

    PDW


    "Bernhard Mayer" <usenetbox@jet2web.cc> wrote in message
    news:c06428fe.0411300126.774276d5@posting.google.com...
    > ron.rice@gmail.com (Ron Rice) wrote in message
    > news:<6e5dfd47.0411291131.27597623@posting.google.com>...
    >
    >> I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    >> various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    >> etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    >> professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    >> something like a 1Ds MarkII?
    >
    > Pro's don't define themselves through the gear they use. If you sell
    > pictures for a living, you're pro. Whether those pictures were taken
    > with a digital, analogue, high end, entry level does not at all make a
    > difference.
    >
    >
    > BTW: I think digital SLR are not sufficient for stock photography.
    > Typical agencies expect 50 Megapixel and up, which you can currently
    > only achieve through digital backs for medium format cameras or high
    > end slide scanners.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:02:12 -0000, "PDW" <Spam@zen.co.uk> wrote:

    >Bernhard,
    >
    >Could you please point me at at 50 Megapixel back as I can't seem to find
    >one!

    Googling, I found this one, a 22 MP back, resulting in 132 MB image
    files:

    <http://www.engadget.com/entry/7055163427338263/>

    jc
  12. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "Ron Rice" <ron.rice@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:6e5dfd47.0411291131.27597623@posting.google.com...
    > Hey folks,
    >
    > I'm in the process of making a huge career change, going from Computer
    > Programming to Photography (actually Photgraphy was my original career
    > many years ago, so I'm returning to my roots).
    >
    > I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    > various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    > etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    > professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    > something like a 1Ds MarkII?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Ron

    Digital cameras are always going to push the boundaries until they become
    the norm. Currently the boundary which separates traditional photography
    from digital is a 4x5 inch film. Many studio pros use these "half plate"
    cameras exclusively but generally they too are entertaining the ideal of
    digital. I have 20D gear and for my 24" x 36" posters, I get exceptional
    results.

    Unfortunately the wall art photographs I make are still from traditional
    film.Yesterday I ordered a 1Ds. I expect now to remove the last obstacle to
    becoming 100% digital. The only suggestion I can make is to buy the most
    advanced camera you can. Soon enough it will become obsolete and need
    replacing. The real trick will be in choosing lenses which will move with
    your upgrade bodies. Once again, go for what is currently best.

    So here is some pertinent advise:
    If you know absolutely how to market your work or, you have someone you can
    pass the marketing to and they know what they are doing... Beg, borrow or
    lease the best equipment you can find. The 3 things which make a successful
    photographer in the order of importance are:

    1. Marketing, 2. marketing, 3 marketing.

    You'll note I said nothing about being able to take a good photograph. This
    is because some of them most successful photographic businesses in the
    world, are staffed by people with no unusual photographic ability. If you
    can't sell your work, you'll just end up posting some photos shot with
    horrendously expensive gear to "Shoot-In" for all the rif-raff to post their
    (unqualified) remarks about!!! And one last thing... What marketing skills
    do you have and what attention have you paid to this area?

    Doug
  13. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    YAG-ART <right@here.now> wrote in message news:<u6toq0pvf28mna0ajto5gsbu06se7jd06a@4ax.com>...

    > >BTW: I think digital SLR are not sufficient for stock photography.
    > >Typical agencies expect 50 Megapixel and up, which you can currently
    > >only achieve through digital backs for medium format cameras or high
    > >end slide scanners.
    >
    >
    > I know lots of pros that use the Canon EOS 1DsMark2 for stock photo

    Oh really, well my comment wasn't heard from someone. I was _told_ by
    stock agencies that they expect 50+MP which I currently cannot achieve
    with my kit. So, if those pros you know would care to share the
    contact, I 'll happily consider those agencies.
  14. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    On 1 Dec 2004 12:35:35 -0800 in <c06428fe.0412011235.4a6803f0@posting.google.com> Bernhard Mayer <usenetbox@jet2web.cc> wrote:
    > YAG-ART <right@here.now> wrote in message news:<u6toq0pvf28mna0ajto5gsbu06se7jd06a@4ax.com>...
    >
    >> >BTW: I think digital SLR are not sufficient for stock photography.
    >> >Typical agencies expect 50 Megapixel and up, which you can currently
    >> >only achieve through digital backs for medium format cameras or high
    >> >end slide scanners.
    >>
    >>
    >> I know lots of pros that use the Canon EOS 1DsMark2 for stock photo
    >
    > Oh really, well my comment wasn't heard from someone. I was _told_ by
    > stock agencies that they expect 50+MP which I currently cannot achieve
    > with my kit. So, if those pros you know would care to share the
    > contact, I 'll happily consider those agencies.

    6x6 medium format scanned at 3200 DPI is approximately 50MP.

    http://www.photographical.net/canon_1ds_mf.html
    for a comparison of medium format vs the 1DS.


    --
    Chris Dukes
    Suspicion breeds confidance -- Brazil
  15. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Bernhard Mayer <usenetbox@jet2web.cc> wrote:

    >> I know lots of pros that use the Canon EOS 1DsMark2 for stock photo
    >
    > Oh really, well my comment wasn't heard from someone. I was _told_ by
    > stock agencies that they expect 50+MP which I currently cannot achieve
    > with my kit. So, if those pros you know would care to share the
    > contact, I 'll happily consider those agencies.

    Most agencies allow upsizing images to achieve the file sizes they want.
    The clients have the idea that file size in megabytes equals quality, so
    the agencies deliver file size. Nevermind that upsizing the images does
    nothing to add quality; the clients want it, so they get it.

    The big agencies seem to allow digital originals from high-end SLRs like
    the 1Ds. You may need to enlarge the files, but many people are using
    these cameras for stock work with the large agencies. I've been looking
    into this myself, since the main reason I got out of photography (as a
    business) in the first place was film, and the only way I'll get back
    in is if I still never have to use film again. And it looks like this
    is now possible.

    --
    Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
  16. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "Ron Rice" <ron.rice@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:6e5dfd47.0411301110.62b37878@posting.google.com...
    > Everyone,
    >
    > Thanks so much for the feedback. Several people commented on the fact
    > that the photographer is more important than the gear. I totally
    > understand that. I have two Fine Arts degrees--a BA in Photography and
    > and MFA in Film. My "personal aesthetic" is well developed. But each
    > pro photography niche has its own "minimum standards" of image
    > resolution and quality, and this is where I'm lost.
    >
    > When I posted my initial message, I was basically wondering if 8
    > megapixels, in combination with high-end lenses, would produce image
    > resolution and quality that meets industry standards for certain types
    > of work. From the various comments, I gather that the 20D is
    > well-suited for events and such, but perhaps not for studio, stock and
    > fine art. That's useful to know.
    >
    > One area I'd really like to explore is Motion Picture Still
    > Photography. On every major movie production, there is a still
    > photographer who shoots scenes for use in promotions. I know these
    > photographers have gone totally digital, but I don't know if 8
    > megapixels is enough to meet the needs of motion picture promotions
    > departments. Any thoughts?

    I think the D20 will be fine for getting started in this area. Spend the big
    bucks on L glass and keep the camera body investment low. Even a used 10D
    would be fine as the studios are used to doing magic with images I bet they
    could make a decent 6-foot poster out of a 10D image.
  17. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Ron Rice wrote:

    > I'm thinking about purchasing the Canon 20D and a few good lenses for
    > various professional applications (stock, studio, events, fine art,
    > etc.) I'd like to hear any comments on whether the 20D is suitable for
    > professional work, or if it's necessary to spend the big bucks on
    > something like a 1Ds MarkII?

    Unless you are going to be using the camera where the camera is likely
    to be damaged, I would invest your cash in the glass. Really good fast
    IS glass will do more to make better images than the 1ds. Then when
    you are generating income, you can upgrade your camera, and use the 20d
    as backup...
Ask a new question

Read More

SLR Photo Cameras