Experiment Reveals The Difference Between Pro Photographers Using $500 Gear VS. Amateur Using $4,950 Gear
Tired of constantly being asked ‘what camera did you use to take that photo?’ and ‘what is the best camera?’ photographers at Mango Street decided to show the difference between pro photographers with amateur gear and an amateur with pro gear.
They gave a high-end $3,300 Canon 5D Mark IV with a $1,650 Canon 35mm f/1.4L II lens to their friend who is not a pro, but had a basic understanding of photography. Meanwhile, the two professional photographers got a cheap (~$500) Canon Rebel T3i with low-end lenses (a kit 18-55mm and a 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens).
See the results below.
More info: Mango Street (h/t: petapixel)
Daniel (Pro with Amateur Gear)
Rachel (Pro with Amateur Gear)
Justin (Amateur with Pro Gear)
Watch the video of the experiment below:
1.2Mviews
Share on FacebookThe difference clearly is lack of understanding how to compose, which was expected. There is no need for an 'experiment' to determine that. It would've been interesting if they had given the pro gear to an photography enthusiast instead of a random dude with basic understanding of photography.
The video shows some better shots of Justin, a few are as good as the pros' as far as composition and story telling is concerned.
Load More Replies...meh, no difference for a normal observer like me I'm sorry. I do get the point though
Thank you. As a photography geek myself (for a middle schooler at least), I see the difference and lighting, but it's true; the difference is small. What I wanted to congratulate you on is your ability to present your opinion in a more passive way: rather than stating a fact, you're stating an opinion, which is what you should do.
Load More Replies...The difference of quality cannot be seen on a 800 pixel long image on a monitor… Show a crop @100% and we will understand the difference ;)
Forget image quality, and look at the composition...
Load More Replies...I'm sorry, but for this kind of picture, with enough light and if you don't do 100% crops, an entry level DSLR and a pro level DSLR make NO DIFFERENCE. Give the pros a crappy single-use camera, the amateurs a medium format camera and print the stuff on A0 posters. Then we are talking.
I guess they are trying to say that if you are an amateur and have the best camera available, it will be a waste because you won't use all the camera potential. And they showed that pro photogs can use cheap cameras and make nice pictures because they have skills that an amateur doesn't have. I think the experiment is valid because that's reality, I'm an amateur and I have the same entry level camera because that's what I can buy and if I was shooting with that expensive a*s camera, I wouldn't bring out his full potential, nor I would need a camera that expensive because I don't work with that.
Load More Replies...The camera change was made because often amateurs want to invest in an expensive camera thinking that will make their photo's better and more HQ, this "experiment" was made to explain that the quality of your camera does nothing for your skill, amazing photos can be made with a throw-away-camera if you now how to use it.
so many spelling mistakes, darn it, an edit button would be nice
Load More Replies...It always helps to know what you're doing. A camera is just a tool like any other.
Everything should be almost the same, except shooter and the camera, to make a rightful comparison.
For amateurs, it may be important to have better equipment because somehow it gives a "sense" of confidence. You could debate what is the reason for people spending more money in their working equipment. Personally i do believe that what makes a photo amazing is the training of the eye and the practice at understanding your personal view, but if spending money works for someone to help keeping them motivated and also with the confidence in the work they are doing i wouldn't be harsh with them. Also this are raw photos or they have been edited? A better way to portrait your fancy camera point would be to see the work of Miroslav Tichý who made his camera from trash and had AMAZING work done. Best vibes.
I can see what you mean, but I have to say that this was a, with all due respect, a lame experiment (sorry if "lame" is offensive, I'm not a native, so I lack words). Both pros could have shown how they can set up their gears in order to take better-than-average pictures, thus making it extremely clear how techniqu is way more important than gear. But then all pictures look pretty much the same (regarding light, etc) and could easily be mistaken by works of the very same person. I mean no offense, but I can't see how this is helpful or instructing to a layman.
give them a compact camera not a DSLR and see the difference then, this literally says nothing besides the composition - and thats not even that bad, give full pro to a random person on the street and give the pros some s****y compact from 10 years ago that most amateurs still use. Any DSLR is still a "good" gear.
I am a pro photographer and I used to show and sell my work in my old neighborhood. I would constantly be asked "what camera do you use?" Like that would matter. Very annoying! At the time, I was using an old manual Nikon FM2 film camera. Nothing fancy at all but a great street shooting camera. It is like asking a great chef what kind of stove to you cook on!! Thanks for this experiment!!
This is like letting a designer using a quick fix design app vs an Amateur using professional software. The designer is going to make something out of nothing, and the amateur won't know the first thing about using the tools he's given.
If this were an experiment, the model would not know whether the person taking the pictures was pro or amateur, or which equipment they were using, neither pro nor amateur would know the purpose of the experiment, there would be a large number of pros, amateurs, and models, and absolutely no selection amongst the photos after the fact. As the "experiment" that this is, however, we know that these were not the case.
The REAL experiment is to see how many people clicked to see this article. WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!!
while I can agree, that gear is not everything, it's still important e.g. if you want shoot some astro photography, you have to have a fast lens. Witout it, you won't see anything
One time I won First Prize in a photography contest using an old low-resolution digital camera that I had bought for five dollars from a yard sale.
And that is the point. :) Congrats on your First Prize!
Load More Replies...would really like to know who sings this song in background and what's it called
Go to the video on YouTube. It's in the description.
Load More Replies...When you look back at the amazing photographs shot 50, 60 and more years ago with equipment that would look shabby next to today's amateur cameras, you know that the important thing is the eye behind the lens, not the lens. ;)
Big difference... With the Pro every shot draws me in... my eyes are drawn to the focal points... With the amateur my eyes are dancing around the photograph looking for something interesting.
I can't get any fb messages unless I am friended first. I am looking for PROFESSIONAL opinions to my very amateur photography (all I have is a Samsung S6 phone. I only use that camera and have just recently started to play with the editing apps it comes with)
If anyone read my comments and commented, or tried to inbox me on th, I need to be friended first,before my app will let me read anything in my fb messenger inbox. I would love to get some opinions on my amateur (Samsung S6 phone) photography.
If you're an expert in this matter, maybe this post mean something... but for the rest of us saw nothing.
So good pictures are not made by the technology but the talented and knowledgable person taking that picture. My, what a shocking discovery.... The next experiment s probably going to prove that the earth is not flat but round!! O.o What exciting times we live it.
The only thing I take away from this is that the model needs to eat something.
So it's about having a ton of experience posing a model and some design education under your belt? No s**t, Sherlock. But ask the pros which equipment they would rather use. I think you'll find out that the gear matters.
The amateur can become pro with time. A good camera can help. There no reason why an amateur photographer shouldn't use expensive gear if he/she can afford it. Besides: a real difference might have been between a very cheap fixed lens camera and an expensive sdlr.
I'm sure there must a difference but I can't see it in this expriment...
This is off topic, but when it said FOLLOW JUSTIN ON TINDER, I cracked up XD (Justin=amateur)
Interesting. I have always maintained that a good workman CAN blame his tools - but a bad workman cannot.
The only thing it shows is that a $500 camera has the same level of clarity as the $5k camera does, beyond that there's no difference in the quality between the two which doesn't say allot for the two pros. The argument about composition is moot here as the amateur does not have to recreate what the pros did but instead direct the model or let the model do her own thing and look for instances to snap shots.
Yes, a "pro" or anyone proficient in the use of a camera can create fantastic shots using any camera, and yes, an amateur will not perform as well regardless of how advanced the camera system is. Did we need an experiment for what should be common sense? But what's always missed in these attempts to say the camera type is not important is that the camera does matter as it's technical abilities enhances the users abilities. As does which lens we use. A landscape or architecture photographer is not going to get the results with a 16MP camera as they would a 50MP camera. A sports photographer will not freeze an image as well with a camera that shoots at less FPS, etc. etc.
You could use a box camera made out of cardboard to photograph this beautiful model and you will get great results. You want a challenge use anything you want and MAKE ROSANNE BARR LOOK THEN YOU HAVE REAL TALENT.
Hay guy you could photograph that model with a box camera made of card board and all of her photos would be EXCELLENT. Remember you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. I am not a professional at anything but I know what I like. You want a challenge use color or black & white or whatever and show me a beautiful picture of rosanne barr, let me know when you are done!
I think it was a good experiment. Showing that what matters much more is the understanding of how to photograph than the quality of the camera(although i do find a 500$ camera to still be a pretty quality camera). I definitely see the difference. I find the pros photographs much more interesting and innovative. Not sure why a lot of people don't see the difference? Or just think this was a silly experiment.
I grew up with a Master of Photographic Arts (PPOC) and posing was the least of things. Lighting was it for him. He walked into his associates' studio and adjusted lights to fit his eye and the results were dramatic (one pro vs another). I had the pleasure of being shown how he saw the world one day and it was all in how light was seen. To experiment with poses is not a real experiment at all. That said he never paid even a thousand for his cameras! Then he had real skill. I am sad over what people call photography today....
Sorry but this doesn't prove anything. As a photographer myself and having an understanding of the whole smeal this is honestly kind of a joke lol.
And surprise the Pro is a better photographer. But if your point is better equipment does not matter then your wrong. In these images and lighting conditions the weakness of the 500 dollar camera was not exposed. But the lack of experience of the armature was. But try again in challenging on location lighting conditions or where optimal lens quality is essential. The importance of a fast lens and quality optics is often over looked in the digital age. But it as important for a DSLR as it was for film SLRs but just like a pro could get great images with a pin hole camera made from a box and using a large format negative a armature bubbles their way through a photo shoot and may stumble on a good image along the way if they take enough shots
Considering all images are a personal code to break with the mind. Who cares who is pro and who is amatuer and who is using what gear? At the end of the day who is creating work that makes me look deeper? And that could be any of these images to any one person... The point (if any) this video should be making is that it is not about your equipment or amount of experience but the images you present at the end of the day and if they have the spark of art that makes people stop and look for a deeper hidden message in the image.
For people who doesn't know much about photography, this video is maybe not bad. But even a bloody amateur like me knows, It's not a matter of expensive gear, its a matter of the light and the composition. I'm using a not really new K20D (190 Euros at ebay) and sometimes I'm even surprised about the pics. Have a look :) : https://500px.com/jojobongo
Did you all catch the very end? Follow Justin on Tinder. Lol
The best photos are taken with really, REALLY old cameras and hand developing in a dark room. There is something that cannot be replicated with Photoshop or any digital camera filters.
Light, post coloring etc ... this was a fairly pointless video. Sorry if your friends want to know where to buy a camera so you all can be more kinfolk. Take that rebel out with a c**p lens into the night and see how it does.
Isn't that the point? It wasn't to figure out which gear potentially takes better photos.
Load More Replies...The difference clearly is lack of understanding how to compose, which was expected. There is no need for an 'experiment' to determine that. It would've been interesting if they had given the pro gear to an photography enthusiast instead of a random dude with basic understanding of photography.
The video shows some better shots of Justin, a few are as good as the pros' as far as composition and story telling is concerned.
Load More Replies...meh, no difference for a normal observer like me I'm sorry. I do get the point though
Thank you. As a photography geek myself (for a middle schooler at least), I see the difference and lighting, but it's true; the difference is small. What I wanted to congratulate you on is your ability to present your opinion in a more passive way: rather than stating a fact, you're stating an opinion, which is what you should do.
Load More Replies...The difference of quality cannot be seen on a 800 pixel long image on a monitor… Show a crop @100% and we will understand the difference ;)
Forget image quality, and look at the composition...
Load More Replies...I'm sorry, but for this kind of picture, with enough light and if you don't do 100% crops, an entry level DSLR and a pro level DSLR make NO DIFFERENCE. Give the pros a crappy single-use camera, the amateurs a medium format camera and print the stuff on A0 posters. Then we are talking.
I guess they are trying to say that if you are an amateur and have the best camera available, it will be a waste because you won't use all the camera potential. And they showed that pro photogs can use cheap cameras and make nice pictures because they have skills that an amateur doesn't have. I think the experiment is valid because that's reality, I'm an amateur and I have the same entry level camera because that's what I can buy and if I was shooting with that expensive a*s camera, I wouldn't bring out his full potential, nor I would need a camera that expensive because I don't work with that.
Load More Replies...The camera change was made because often amateurs want to invest in an expensive camera thinking that will make their photo's better and more HQ, this "experiment" was made to explain that the quality of your camera does nothing for your skill, amazing photos can be made with a throw-away-camera if you now how to use it.
so many spelling mistakes, darn it, an edit button would be nice
Load More Replies...It always helps to know what you're doing. A camera is just a tool like any other.
Everything should be almost the same, except shooter and the camera, to make a rightful comparison.
For amateurs, it may be important to have better equipment because somehow it gives a "sense" of confidence. You could debate what is the reason for people spending more money in their working equipment. Personally i do believe that what makes a photo amazing is the training of the eye and the practice at understanding your personal view, but if spending money works for someone to help keeping them motivated and also with the confidence in the work they are doing i wouldn't be harsh with them. Also this are raw photos or they have been edited? A better way to portrait your fancy camera point would be to see the work of Miroslav Tichý who made his camera from trash and had AMAZING work done. Best vibes.
I can see what you mean, but I have to say that this was a, with all due respect, a lame experiment (sorry if "lame" is offensive, I'm not a native, so I lack words). Both pros could have shown how they can set up their gears in order to take better-than-average pictures, thus making it extremely clear how techniqu is way more important than gear. But then all pictures look pretty much the same (regarding light, etc) and could easily be mistaken by works of the very same person. I mean no offense, but I can't see how this is helpful or instructing to a layman.
give them a compact camera not a DSLR and see the difference then, this literally says nothing besides the composition - and thats not even that bad, give full pro to a random person on the street and give the pros some s****y compact from 10 years ago that most amateurs still use. Any DSLR is still a "good" gear.
I am a pro photographer and I used to show and sell my work in my old neighborhood. I would constantly be asked "what camera do you use?" Like that would matter. Very annoying! At the time, I was using an old manual Nikon FM2 film camera. Nothing fancy at all but a great street shooting camera. It is like asking a great chef what kind of stove to you cook on!! Thanks for this experiment!!
This is like letting a designer using a quick fix design app vs an Amateur using professional software. The designer is going to make something out of nothing, and the amateur won't know the first thing about using the tools he's given.
If this were an experiment, the model would not know whether the person taking the pictures was pro or amateur, or which equipment they were using, neither pro nor amateur would know the purpose of the experiment, there would be a large number of pros, amateurs, and models, and absolutely no selection amongst the photos after the fact. As the "experiment" that this is, however, we know that these were not the case.
The REAL experiment is to see how many people clicked to see this article. WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!!
while I can agree, that gear is not everything, it's still important e.g. if you want shoot some astro photography, you have to have a fast lens. Witout it, you won't see anything
One time I won First Prize in a photography contest using an old low-resolution digital camera that I had bought for five dollars from a yard sale.
And that is the point. :) Congrats on your First Prize!
Load More Replies...would really like to know who sings this song in background and what's it called
Go to the video on YouTube. It's in the description.
Load More Replies...When you look back at the amazing photographs shot 50, 60 and more years ago with equipment that would look shabby next to today's amateur cameras, you know that the important thing is the eye behind the lens, not the lens. ;)
Big difference... With the Pro every shot draws me in... my eyes are drawn to the focal points... With the amateur my eyes are dancing around the photograph looking for something interesting.
I can't get any fb messages unless I am friended first. I am looking for PROFESSIONAL opinions to my very amateur photography (all I have is a Samsung S6 phone. I only use that camera and have just recently started to play with the editing apps it comes with)
If anyone read my comments and commented, or tried to inbox me on th, I need to be friended first,before my app will let me read anything in my fb messenger inbox. I would love to get some opinions on my amateur (Samsung S6 phone) photography.
If you're an expert in this matter, maybe this post mean something... but for the rest of us saw nothing.
So good pictures are not made by the technology but the talented and knowledgable person taking that picture. My, what a shocking discovery.... The next experiment s probably going to prove that the earth is not flat but round!! O.o What exciting times we live it.
The only thing I take away from this is that the model needs to eat something.
So it's about having a ton of experience posing a model and some design education under your belt? No s**t, Sherlock. But ask the pros which equipment they would rather use. I think you'll find out that the gear matters.
The amateur can become pro with time. A good camera can help. There no reason why an amateur photographer shouldn't use expensive gear if he/she can afford it. Besides: a real difference might have been between a very cheap fixed lens camera and an expensive sdlr.
I'm sure there must a difference but I can't see it in this expriment...
This is off topic, but when it said FOLLOW JUSTIN ON TINDER, I cracked up XD (Justin=amateur)
Interesting. I have always maintained that a good workman CAN blame his tools - but a bad workman cannot.
The only thing it shows is that a $500 camera has the same level of clarity as the $5k camera does, beyond that there's no difference in the quality between the two which doesn't say allot for the two pros. The argument about composition is moot here as the amateur does not have to recreate what the pros did but instead direct the model or let the model do her own thing and look for instances to snap shots.
Yes, a "pro" or anyone proficient in the use of a camera can create fantastic shots using any camera, and yes, an amateur will not perform as well regardless of how advanced the camera system is. Did we need an experiment for what should be common sense? But what's always missed in these attempts to say the camera type is not important is that the camera does matter as it's technical abilities enhances the users abilities. As does which lens we use. A landscape or architecture photographer is not going to get the results with a 16MP camera as they would a 50MP camera. A sports photographer will not freeze an image as well with a camera that shoots at less FPS, etc. etc.
You could use a box camera made out of cardboard to photograph this beautiful model and you will get great results. You want a challenge use anything you want and MAKE ROSANNE BARR LOOK THEN YOU HAVE REAL TALENT.
Hay guy you could photograph that model with a box camera made of card board and all of her photos would be EXCELLENT. Remember you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. I am not a professional at anything but I know what I like. You want a challenge use color or black & white or whatever and show me a beautiful picture of rosanne barr, let me know when you are done!
I think it was a good experiment. Showing that what matters much more is the understanding of how to photograph than the quality of the camera(although i do find a 500$ camera to still be a pretty quality camera). I definitely see the difference. I find the pros photographs much more interesting and innovative. Not sure why a lot of people don't see the difference? Or just think this was a silly experiment.
I grew up with a Master of Photographic Arts (PPOC) and posing was the least of things. Lighting was it for him. He walked into his associates' studio and adjusted lights to fit his eye and the results were dramatic (one pro vs another). I had the pleasure of being shown how he saw the world one day and it was all in how light was seen. To experiment with poses is not a real experiment at all. That said he never paid even a thousand for his cameras! Then he had real skill. I am sad over what people call photography today....
Sorry but this doesn't prove anything. As a photographer myself and having an understanding of the whole smeal this is honestly kind of a joke lol.
And surprise the Pro is a better photographer. But if your point is better equipment does not matter then your wrong. In these images and lighting conditions the weakness of the 500 dollar camera was not exposed. But the lack of experience of the armature was. But try again in challenging on location lighting conditions or where optimal lens quality is essential. The importance of a fast lens and quality optics is often over looked in the digital age. But it as important for a DSLR as it was for film SLRs but just like a pro could get great images with a pin hole camera made from a box and using a large format negative a armature bubbles their way through a photo shoot and may stumble on a good image along the way if they take enough shots
Considering all images are a personal code to break with the mind. Who cares who is pro and who is amatuer and who is using what gear? At the end of the day who is creating work that makes me look deeper? And that could be any of these images to any one person... The point (if any) this video should be making is that it is not about your equipment or amount of experience but the images you present at the end of the day and if they have the spark of art that makes people stop and look for a deeper hidden message in the image.
For people who doesn't know much about photography, this video is maybe not bad. But even a bloody amateur like me knows, It's not a matter of expensive gear, its a matter of the light and the composition. I'm using a not really new K20D (190 Euros at ebay) and sometimes I'm even surprised about the pics. Have a look :) : https://500px.com/jojobongo
Did you all catch the very end? Follow Justin on Tinder. Lol
The best photos are taken with really, REALLY old cameras and hand developing in a dark room. There is something that cannot be replicated with Photoshop or any digital camera filters.
Light, post coloring etc ... this was a fairly pointless video. Sorry if your friends want to know where to buy a camera so you all can be more kinfolk. Take that rebel out with a c**p lens into the night and see how it does.
Isn't that the point? It wasn't to figure out which gear potentially takes better photos.
Load More Replies...
248
118