I Got Tired Of People Giving My Camera The Credit For My Photos, So I Bought The Cheapest Camera And Lens I Could Find To Prove Them Wrong
When I began posting my photos online, I started getting comments like ‘wow, you must have a great camera’ or ‘anybody can take photos like these with expensive gear’ or ‘I can’t take photos like these because I can’t afford an expensive camera like yours’. It breaks my heart when I hear people say things like this. Or when they feel like they can’t get any better or they don’t have a chance because they have a cheap camera.
So I had enough of these comments and decided to prove them wrong by finding the cheapest camera and lens I could find and take some photos with them!
I got on eBay and found a used Canon t2i for $183 and a Pentax 50mm 1.7 lens for $15. And that’s it! All of the equipment I needed for just under $200! I took my boys and my camera out and did a photo shoot and these are the photos we took!
I did the editing with Photoshop and Lightroom, so I thought I would put that out there before everyone starts screaming photoshop! I don’t care that everyone thinks that editing is cheating! I have a vision in my head when I shoot, so I get what I need out of the camera and then I literally paint it the way I envisioned it. It’s a crucial put of my art. And before you say you can’t afford Photoshop and Lightroom, I only pay $2.50 a week for mine. That’s literally less than a cappuccino!
I created a free 4-hour photography course called ‘The Photography Secrets Course’. I show you everything I did from how to shot photos like these to how to edit them. You can even use the techniques I teach in the course to take better photos with your smartphone.
You can Sign up for the course or see more of my work on my website.
More info: philliphaumesserphotography.com
460Kviews
Share on Facebook
As nice as these photos are don't get me wrong it still has to do with the camera I'm not saying you're not a good photographer but it still just the camera. a cannon is a very good camera brand that's the only band my father will buy and he's a wonderful photographer. I would like to see these done with the cheapest NEW camera not used. Used still means it was good quality and looks like it still is. Let me see if you can do this with a disposable camera and DIY attachments then I would be impressed feel free to go and down vote me but I don't care the still is not a cheap camera when you make $ 651 a month. It's only cheap if you're a rich person.
Hi, no, I'm not going to downvote you, I'm actually going to upvote you! ;) You have a great point. However, my point in this article wasn't as much to see how cheap you can go, but to show a cheap alternative to the $1,800 + cameras and lenses and still get similar results. I'm all for the DIY's and disposable cameras, that kind of thing makes people very creative and I admire that!
Load More Replies...
Isn't the Canon t2i the Canon 550D in Europe? The 550D body cost about 700€ (in Germany, might be nearly the same price in the US) when it was released in 2010. Don't understand me wrong, your pictures are amazing and I know it's not just because of the camera. But I think you missed the challenge you set to yourself. You have shown that you can get a great camera for less than 200$ and shouldn't mind the age of 7 years. But it was a 700€/$ camera nevertheless and not the cheapest you could get. In my point of view, it would have been more impressive, if you had bought a camera which was never more expensive than 200€/$ to begin with.
Try shooting with any of these circa 1999 to 2002 cameras http://www.digicamhistory.com/1999+.html
Load More Replies...
This is very nicely done. I have literally no idea on how to photos, but I will repeatedly meow at mai Hooman so that I can show him this post :)
It would be great if you would show also photos before using photoshop to compare Those look great and with good light and postprocessing skills you can do a lot of magic even with shittiest camera. So I would like to admire your photoshop/LR skills more! :)
quality photography and point well made, also respect for working with the most difficult of all subjects, children and animals :-) Pentax renders very nicely
What you should do is an actual comparison. Take the same photo with 3 different cameras and see how they turn out -- without any Photoshop editing. You can get a Kodak Disc camera on eBay for about $10. Then your choice for the other two cameras.
I can't take good photographs at all, and I have so much respect for people who can. If it was all about the tools, then I should be able to pick up the highest quality oil paint and brushes and suddenly give Monet a run for his fame. Yeah right.
Beautiful. It looks almost magical. You, mister, have a pure talent.
I really don’t get this. How is that a cheap camera, when people say they can’t take photos like that because they can’t afford a nice camera it probably means that they’re like me using the crappy camera on an old iPhone, maybe with a set of clip on lenses that cost a fiver. I literally have £75 for food and essentials for myself, my husband and our 9 month old this month and you’re classing a cheap camera as something that cost near enough $200, wtf, I couldn’t even afford the ‘less than a cappuccino’ photo editing software you’re using.
..& i would additionally like to add that i can see a ‘style’ that can be achieved with even these silly little disposable cameras as you have ‘smarts’ in creativity, i am sure here! Please however do enjoy your ‘works’,& stay in that mind frame.Do understand many are going to say that your choice of camera is good to start with, this is true however with most newer smart phones the camera is darn good & i have seen amazing shots done on these/& crappy ones;bottom line one Must have some skill,& you do, a lot.I upvote you on being courages in this critical harsh world..pls keep yourself well, this is so much more important for i might be great @ many an Art/& even Natural medicine,& this reason is for balance as i live with a cruel rare sickness.Dont allow ills’ to hold your life back, as it can!
Very true, a good photo is created by the photographer's mind, not by the camera!
As a photographer, we all deal witht his. Does not bother me any more, but I do love to go and shoot with a 1920s Kodak Box Camera or my massive 1967 Mamiya Super 23 Press Camera and still make great images.
That is AWESOME!!! I've always wanted to try a Box Camera! :D
Load More Replies...
They think that they are trying to belittle the photographer by saying it is the equipment. The reality is anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows that people who make rude comments like that are really just making excuses for their own lack of motivation or drive to learn and create anything. If photography is not their priority, fine, but if it is you find a way no matter what. I am a single mom of three, I am low income, but I LOVE photography so much...I started with a film camera, eventually was given a digital as a gift because someone saw my passion and drive with my cheap flea market film camera...and when that started to die after 10 years I entered a photography contest to WIN a new camera. I told myself if I wasn't good enough to win a camera I didn't deserve it. And I won that camera and that is what I work with today, cost me nothing!! Also gimp is a free alternative to photoshop. If it's in you, there are NO EXCUSES!
So true! And you're right, there's so much creativity locked up inside just waiting to be released. I know so many people who's lives were changed because of a gifted camera. I'm thinking of an (used to be) alcoholic right now who used a camera someone gave him to distract him from alcohol and turned his life around.
Load More Replies...
I totally agree with Phillip, this is an art form. You can take outstanding images with a pin hole camera and it really does not get cheaper than that (from the film and print days). People saying they could take great images if they had the right expensive gear are likened to those who say great chefs make it because of their expensive knives and pots.
I am a photographer and I will say that not everyone with a nice camera can be professional. I have been asked the same question. What camera do you use your pictures are stunning. My response. If you sat down and ate a good meal, you aren't going to ask the chef what pan they used.
Love those pictures-amazing! The concept as well : ) PS. Telling someone they take only good pictures because of a good camera is the same as telling piano prodigies the only reason their playing is good is because of the grand concert piano.
I read an interview with a guy who shot weddings. When he'd pull out his medium format people would scoff about what pretentious overkill it was. Then he'd grab the DSLR and it would about how he's cookie cutter and uncle Jim has a bette camera. Then he pulled out a digital Leica and people would laugh at the stupid consumer camera in his hands. You've received PR from your exercise so have at it, but for most of us; don't worry about what other people give credit to. It's an exercise in futility. My own way of dealing with it was to use the most DIY stuff for lighting I could make (even though I have all the good stuff) just to mess with people who snicker, until they see the back of the camera. It's petty of me, but the reactions are priceless when they start to give you instant respect. People crediting the camera are just making it about themselves so they can have an excuse as to why they can't do it. Ignore them. They're just having a bad....life.
A GREAT photographer sees what the normal eye doesn't, in this case, you see much more than I will ever see & I'm amazed at the angles, the lighting, the emotion in each. No, it's not the camera, it's the person with the magical eyes, behind the camera, that takes all the credit. Kudos & thanks for sharing!
Ansel Adams cameras were not as good as that you can find today, but his vision and his dark room editing( IE processing) is what made his pictures. While good equipment can help, it is still the person behind the camera to make good photos. While visiting the museum I saw his prints, the one thing I wished was that they show a couple of straight prints to show his actual vision.
What is wrong with you anyway? A real photographer would've taken the photos with a $12.99 (for two no less) Fuji disposable camera and would have at least had that cheap camera be the last photo in this montage.
If you take my Fuji disposable camera challenge, here is a link - Walmart - https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fujifilm-Disposable-35mm-Camera-With-Flash-2-Pack/11019775 . 20b7e790-5...38ab4.jpeg 
I don't know. Photoshop does help alot, whether you use a cheap or expensive lens. Other than that, your vision is still great and I love what you've done.
It's nice stuff, and i like the point you're trying to make, but Photoshop subscriptions are exactly the kind of money that people who are not professional photographers cannot generally afford to justify along with the rest of their monthly expenses.
I use Photoshop and Lightroom every single day. It is a very powerful tool for the price. Anybody can afford $2.50 a week! We spend more than that on snacks cigarets or whatever else we can/should probably live without anyway! I literally don't even miss the $2.50 a week!
Load More Replies...
I shoot with analog cameras, and this photo was taken with smena 8m that cost me just $ 5... F1000030-5...5a3b3a.jpg 
*cough cough b******t cough* You went out and bought an exceptionally good camera from 2010, then used professional software to edit your shots. This does little to convince me that you are a 'great photographer.' I am not disputing for even a moment that the photographer makes the image, however the use of professional equipment cheapens your point. I took the following sunset photo with a Sony Cybershot from Goodwill ($3): dsc04120_2...365258.jpg 
I didn’t say it was easy to do or that the equipment was nonprofessional. The Canon t2i is an amazing camera for the price. And there is a learning curve to taking great photos and using professional editing software. You still have to put the work into it. My point is that you don’t have to pay an arm and a leg or sell a kidney so you can afford expensive equipment. I want to make this as easy and cheap for beginning photographers as possible. That’s why I made the course and that's why I'm giving it away for free! This is the stuff I wish someone told me when I started out in 2015. So I’m just paying it forward.
Load More Replies...
If anyone actually wants a good quality and affordable 10 in 1 Phone Lens Kit, I just bought this one at https://aweandco.com/products/10-in-1-phone-lens-kit and it is honestly awesome!
I am not that much of a photographer, but it is really kind of irritating to hear smth like: "What a nice photo! Your camera is unexpectedly good for its size!" etc. etc. Indeed. I do understand the author of the post.
Okay, it still has something to do with the camera - there are cameras which one could buy for less than $100 - but they take awful, low-resolution photos which would require extreme editing not to look fatal. But of course, the actual photography art is a combination of the photographing skills, the technology used (camera) and the editing skills (if the photo is actually edited). If you're a bad photographer, your photos might possibly still look bad, even when holding a camera which costs some thousand dollars.
I think that it's cute that you think that $200 is cheap. Let's use your cell phone or a $50 camera. I do agree that to some degree it is taking the time to envision what you want to create. Figuring out lighting and angles, color and perspective is just as important as having the right equipment.
I wouldn't down your photography because the photos look great. But I'm from a different era where if you wanted a pic like this, you had to get out at 4 in the morning, gather some tin foil and a toothpick and six other odd items, put a sheet up over something, add one more lens, maybe try some plastic wrap, then wait for the absolute right light and finally, finally you got the photo you envisioned. If you weren't creative and willing to go to great lengths like that, you didn't get the great photos. That's what people mean when they talk about great photography being an art. Having watched some folks going that extra mile, being so very innovative, and struggling to achieve great photos in the past, I tend to look at photoshop and other fix it programs as cheating but truth be told I bet any one of those older photographers would love to have had photoshop as an aid back then. But either way, you can't this from a CHEAP camera.
I just think what difference does it make what kind of camera you are using if the pictures are going to be photoshop'd within and inch of their life? They are very beautiful, though. Good job.
I am a professional photographer too and here all I can see is a very good advertising strategy, that's all! Congrats! I too agree that if you don't have the eye to see what needs to captured, than it's irrelevant what camera gear you use, but after reading what do you consider a cheap camera and lense (Canon t2i and a Pentax 50mm 1.7 lens) my first thought was that these photos will be as good as any other photos you took, with a more expensive gear! I understand that the price for the equipment was cheap, but the lense is a VERY good one. Try to shoot these, or any other thing with a worse camera (a point-and-shoot) and if you use a DSLR, than use the worst lense (18-55mm) and DON'T edit them in photoshop. That's what I would expect after reading the title.
I agree with you. I have a 1970's F3 that I shoot film through, and although its 40 years old, the lenses are scratched and the shutter is slow, its the eye of the photographer that knows how to set the image, look at the light, figure out the direction of motion, looks, eyes, body position, natural positions etc. The camera allows for capturing more than we ever could before, but it still takes the artist to see the image and make the camera do the work.
I must agree with you. It is not the camera. The camera does not frame the picture or find the shot. That requires the eye of the shooter and sometimes a little luck for the shot. People have been taking amazing pictures for years and years. Some of the best and most candid shots I have seen were taken with an 120 film camera. With any hobby, you can do very good work, as long as you are aware of the capabilities and limitations of the equipment you use. I think of the difference in woodworkers.. There are workers that have invested thousands of dollars in all sorts of power equipment that can accurately build a piece of furniture in a short amount of time. Then you have the ones that use all hand tools and create the same furniture, but may take days. Is one necessarily better than the other,?It is just a matter of knowing yourself, and the equipment that you use. Please keep up the excellent work.
Most of the very best pictures I've ever seen (and taken) were with a cheap SLR and cheap lens. The key is knowing how to use a camer's features, light and composition. Some of the worst pictures I've ever seen were taken with expensive smartphone "cameras". The worse SLR is still superior to the best smartphone. Phone pushers know that, that's why they're pushing attachments to make their pathetic smartphone cameras more SLR-like. The problem is when all you as a picture viewer see is smartphone c**p, you begin to thing it's actually good.
A good photographer can capture an image with pretty much anything. A good camera brings better technical quality to the images, but that's pretty much it. A bad pose, bad lighting choice, wrong focal and aperture setting, wrong angle, doesn't get magically "fixed" by a better camera, nor does a better camera make a bad photographer automatically better. The photographer has an idea what s(he) wants to achieve, and once that is set, the gear makes less of a difference.
Great photos, but would you mind posting an overview of your PP workflow? I'd be very interested to see the difference between the out-of-camera shots and the final images. You certainly have talent though, that's for sure. I've been shooting digital for more than 10 years, and some of my best shots were on my lowly 500D with the kit lens when I started.
Cheapest camera has no lens, it is a coffee can with a hole in it. Pinhole cameras in general can cost $2-$5 to make.
Isn't a $200 camera (specially if it costs that second handed) a professional camera already? When I think cheap I think of cameras that don't even take lenses and even those tend to get too expensive. And then... I wonder how these photos looked just as photos, no editing. Editing is a whole other realm of skill and one can get the most plain looking photo and make something unbelievable out of it as long as they have enough skill, right? So with that I have two things to say, 1, this post doesn't prove anything, if you want to prove something to the regular people, use regular items, most regular Joe's don't even know why a camera uses a lense. 2 and most important, if you know your skill and you believe in your work, don't worry about what other people think. Do what you do best and let other's opinions just pass by.
You can do it cheaper Phillip,... Try out CHDK on a Canon Ixus - All the raw and Magic Lantern style features, on a point-n-shoot. They can be fantastic little cameras when you need to travel light.
Why do you believe film vs digital would make a difference?
Load More Replies... I would like to say firstly that to concern yourself with peoples’ comments IS part of todays life, why justify. I say this as i am a well established Specialist Artists,& in many areas. I create photos with extremely limited equipments, no considered real cameras & i literally create lighting & ‘made effects’ to blend into the picture~ I’ve done this for over 35 years & i still use the same methods for my advertising/s...& i constantly get accused of using ALL THIS STUFF’! I srug my shoulders & say ‘whatever’..& usually the same people want my Arts’ as they can not figure how i do things~ thats the REALITY. Understand most get annoyed when they cant figure out certian elements of your own abilities, thus you see, what i call, the mask falls off the individuals. That word is forgotten too; digital world has created lots of paranioa/& for good/bad reasons. Never feel you must explain yourself to anybody as it will only put more demands on you to apease some very stupid humaniods:) 😌
Very nicely done but I have to say, some of the photo quality credit does go to the camera. I have a fairly old iPod that takes very blurry, pixelated photos. Even if I found the perfect angle and lighting, it could still be much nicer. I realize that it isn't a proper camera but it is very convenient for travel and I wish it took nicer photos. Though I also have a very nice, fairly new Sony camera, which takes photos that are absolutely incredible in comparison. They are quite nice photos, regardless, I think. I still edit photos from both cameras but my Sony ones are always nicer, before and after editing. You make a good point that you don't need a ridiculously expensive camera to shoot nice photos but it certainly helps.
When Kai Man Wong was still at Digital Rev he did a series "Pro Photographers, cheap camera challenges" where a pro photographer was given the cheapest camera he could find to take photos in the streets of Hongkong. And with "cheap" he ment really really crappy. Watch Chase Jarvis come to grips with a Lego camera, fashion photograper Lara Jade with a An Pan Man camera and Phil Bloom with a Barbie camera https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7ECB90D96DF59DE5 It's true: a good (professional) photographer can take good pictures with any camera turning its limits in his favour. A bad photographer can't take really good pictures no matter how expensive his camera. (And I myself am probably a good example of the latter)
Chase Jarvis did a project titled "the best camera is the one that's with you" around the camera in the I-phone https://www.chasejarvis.com/project/the-best-camera/ When Kai Man Wong was still with Digital Rev he did a series "Pro Photographer Cheap Camera challenge" where he sent a professional photographer into the streets of Hongkong with a - sometimes very very - cheap camera. Including Chase Jarvis with a Lego camera, fashion photographer Lara Jade with a An Pan Man camera and Phil Bloom with a Barbie camera! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv0n52-ncmg&list=PL7ECB90D96DF59DE5 It's true: a good photographer can make decent to very good shots with any camera. All it takes is to come to grips with and get used to the limitations. Bad photographers with expensive camera's is a different story (I myself am probably a good example of that) In the end it's still the person behind the viewfinder who creates the pictures.
"I remember when"... there was no adobe corp. and we only had "Darkroom"
I used to sell my photographs. I started out with a Kodak Instamatic 44 Made in the U.S.A. then I bought a canon AE1.. the thing I always heard was... well, anybody can take a picture.. it's another thing to actually paint. I would tell them that anybody can paint a picture. they can paint it in their living room.. but I have to go out and FIND a picture and it has to be the perfect opportunity to sell that picture. I had people buying my photographs so they could paint them.
I worked as a lithographer for 18 years and developed my photographic skills since I was 10 years old. My original camera is a 65-year-old Agfa Gevaert box camera. I have several Canon cameras and others. The "cheap" one is a decades old Canon G9. It's small and light weight, so it's easy to carry when I do my early morning 10-mile walk at a nearby lake. I also have a Canon 10D, 40D and a 60D. (I have no reason to upgrade at this point in life.) The quality of the Agfa Gevaert and G9 is easily equal to the quality of the Canon Ds. It's been my experience that the lens is the determining factor for quality. If the image captured by the lens is poor, the most expensive, high quality camera in the world cannot make up the difference.
Great work man and Proved your point "Skills matters more then Equipment to capture a moment" :)
Good Photography and i will learn from your course. People also say to those "if you Brought NEW DSLR you are not a Photographer" - An amerture has to began the photography from start. Those who mock the new photographers - are not owning the camera or interest, just they spend time in useless by mocking others. And you said you have done photoshop/lightroom - yes photographers do. Even they shoot raw, they have to do some correction. Good post phillip
You have a beautiful eye! I love your use of light and shadow and the intimacy and emotional connections you create in these photos. I love photography and aspire to improve my techniques. Any words of wisdom or suggestions for an amateur?
Thank you so much Monica! I packed my free course with as much info as I could offer a beginner. You should check it out! ;)
Load More Replies... 
I think people shouldn't instantly hate on people as soon as they do something good, they should see true art and passion instead of a fancy camera, not all photos are good because of the camera but because of the one who created the photos
siple techniques, use spaciing in the composure, make the object not too far away or too close unless thats what you want to covey, then have good lghting, hazy cloudy/bright days work best to cast soft light, and its easiest to edit in post because its clean lighting. thats two of the main points of shooting the next is editing in the mood, mood has to do with red and blue because red is happy intense and bright, blue is dark and sad and somber. add a vignette to darken the edges of the photo, add gold or yellow hues to make it feel rustic, pump up the contrast and exposure, after that every photo you take will look pretty good, dont over do it
It's a $9.99 a month subscription. You actually get more than just Photoshop and Lightroom, and you get all of the updates/upgrades they come up with. It's completely worth it for me!
Load More Replies... The photos are great. You are a great photographer. How do you make everything blurry/fuzzy around the main subject?
It's the lens that creates the blurry background and foreground. The lens has a wide aperture, that's what the 1.7 is. The wider the aperture the more blur you get.
Load More Replies...
This goes to show that its not always the camera, but instead its who is holding it and what they can do with it in the same way that Formula 1 drivers have nearly identical cars yet look what a difference Ayrton Senna, Jackie Stewart, Michael Schumacher, Lewis Hamilton and Sebastien Vettel can do with their skills set.
first off: you are a great photographer. a hammer is just a hammer without the skill of a carpenter. second: $200 is nowhere near "inexpensive" for a non pro setup. sorry. your very talented but you failed to make the point you set out to make to the people you intended to make it. again your point is valid. you just failed to make it.
I have seen some of these pics on other posts here on BP. Something to do with photoshop or maybe cheap camera professional photographer. Either way, bravo!
I distinctly remember it too, i think was the same subject matter just worded different.
Load More Replies... 
Thank you Tih Nicastro! I used a Canon t2i with a Pentax 50mm 1.7 lens.
Load More Replies...
I am no expert, but I do love taking photos and I know it's not the equipment that makes you a good photographer but the ability to create using your eyes/brain, composition and lighting are of course hugely important too! Wonderful subject.
THese are nice but a better camera would have made them .........better
Beautiful pictures. It must be irritating when people think the camera does all the work - the right tools help, but tools are nothing without the creative mind behind them. You, sir, are incredible :)
My, you made a bargain to find such a great camera for under 200$! ;)
First, you don't owe anyone an explanation or response to negative bs they're tossing your way. Second, your boys are absolutely gorgeous as is your photography. I once looked at Photoshop and it just looked like a bunch of scary, confusing things. Why wouldn't an artist use any tool they needed to get to the end result of their vision? Meh, people really suck nowadays, so brave behind the screen and hammering away negativity on their keyboards. Keep doing your thing, it's beautiful.
Well..you have to develop photographic film when it's out of camera, same with digital film. Digitally developing gives quite a lot more options and requires less dirty work then film though.
Load More Replies... As nice as these photos are don't get me wrong it still has to do with the camera I'm not saying you're not a good photographer but it still just the camera. a cannon is a very good camera brand that's the only band my father will buy and he's a wonderful photographer. I would like to see these done with the cheapest NEW camera not used. Used still means it was good quality and looks like it still is. Let me see if you can do this with a disposable camera and DIY attachments then I would be impressed feel free to go and down vote me but I don't care the still is not a cheap camera when you make $ 651 a month. It's only cheap if you're a rich person.
Hi, no, I'm not going to downvote you, I'm actually going to upvote you! ;) You have a great point. However, my point in this article wasn't as much to see how cheap you can go, but to show a cheap alternative to the $1,800 + cameras and lenses and still get similar results. I'm all for the DIY's and disposable cameras, that kind of thing makes people very creative and I admire that!
Load More Replies... Isn't the Canon t2i the Canon 550D in Europe? The 550D body cost about 700€ (in Germany, might be nearly the same price in the US) when it was released in 2010. Don't understand me wrong, your pictures are amazing and I know it's not just because of the camera. But I think you missed the challenge you set to yourself. You have shown that you can get a great camera for less than 200$ and shouldn't mind the age of 7 years. But it was a 700€/$ camera nevertheless and not the cheapest you could get. In my point of view, it would have been more impressive, if you had bought a camera which was never more expensive than 200€/$ to begin with.
Try shooting with any of these circa 1999 to 2002 cameras http://www.digicamhistory.com/1999+.html
Load More Replies... This is very nicely done. I have literally no idea on how to photos, but I will repeatedly meow at mai Hooman so that I can show him this post :)
It would be great if you would show also photos before using photoshop to compare Those look great and with good light and postprocessing skills you can do a lot of magic even with shittiest camera. So I would like to admire your photoshop/LR skills more! :)
quality photography and point well made, also respect for working with the most difficult of all subjects, children and animals :-) Pentax renders very nicely
What you should do is an actual comparison. Take the same photo with 3 different cameras and see how they turn out -- without any Photoshop editing. You can get a Kodak Disc camera on eBay for about $10. Then your choice for the other two cameras.
I can't take good photographs at all, and I have so much respect for people who can. If it was all about the tools, then I should be able to pick up the highest quality oil paint and brushes and suddenly give Monet a run for his fame. Yeah right.
Beautiful. It looks almost magical. You, mister, have a pure talent.
I really don’t get this. How is that a cheap camera, when people say they can’t take photos like that because they can’t afford a nice camera it probably means that they’re like me using the crappy camera on an old iPhone, maybe with a set of clip on lenses that cost a fiver. I literally have £75 for food and essentials for myself, my husband and our 9 month old this month and you’re classing a cheap camera as something that cost near enough $200, wtf, I couldn’t even afford the ‘less than a cappuccino’ photo editing software you’re using.
..& i would additionally like to add that i can see a ‘style’ that can be achieved with even these silly little disposable cameras as you have ‘smarts’ in creativity, i am sure here! Please however do enjoy your ‘works’,& stay in that mind frame.Do understand many are going to say that your choice of camera is good to start with, this is true however with most newer smart phones the camera is darn good & i have seen amazing shots done on these/& crappy ones;bottom line one Must have some skill,& you do, a lot.I upvote you on being courages in this critical harsh world..pls keep yourself well, this is so much more important for i might be great @ many an Art/& even Natural medicine,& this reason is for balance as i live with a cruel rare sickness.Dont allow ills’ to hold your life back, as it can!
Very true, a good photo is created by the photographer's mind, not by the camera!
As a photographer, we all deal witht his. Does not bother me any more, but I do love to go and shoot with a 1920s Kodak Box Camera or my massive 1967 Mamiya Super 23 Press Camera and still make great images.
That is AWESOME!!! I've always wanted to try a Box Camera! :D
Load More Replies... They think that they are trying to belittle the photographer by saying it is the equipment. The reality is anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows that people who make rude comments like that are really just making excuses for their own lack of motivation or drive to learn and create anything. If photography is not their priority, fine, but if it is you find a way no matter what. I am a single mom of three, I am low income, but I LOVE photography so much...I started with a film camera, eventually was given a digital as a gift because someone saw my passion and drive with my cheap flea market film camera...and when that started to die after 10 years I entered a photography contest to WIN a new camera. I told myself if I wasn't good enough to win a camera I didn't deserve it. And I won that camera and that is what I work with today, cost me nothing!! Also gimp is a free alternative to photoshop. If it's in you, there are NO EXCUSES!
So true! And you're right, there's so much creativity locked up inside just waiting to be released. I know so many people who's lives were changed because of a gifted camera. I'm thinking of an (used to be) alcoholic right now who used a camera someone gave him to distract him from alcohol and turned his life around.
Load More Replies... I totally agree with Phillip, this is an art form. You can take outstanding images with a pin hole camera and it really does not get cheaper than that (from the film and print days). People saying they could take great images if they had the right expensive gear are likened to those who say great chefs make it because of their expensive knives and pots.
I am a photographer and I will say that not everyone with a nice camera can be professional. I have been asked the same question. What camera do you use your pictures are stunning. My response. If you sat down and ate a good meal, you aren't going to ask the chef what pan they used.
Love those pictures-amazing! The concept as well : ) PS. Telling someone they take only good pictures because of a good camera is the same as telling piano prodigies the only reason their playing is good is because of the grand concert piano.
I read an interview with a guy who shot weddings. When he'd pull out his medium format people would scoff about what pretentious overkill it was. Then he'd grab the DSLR and it would about how he's cookie cutter and uncle Jim has a bette camera. Then he pulled out a digital Leica and people would laugh at the stupid consumer camera in his hands. You've received PR from your exercise so have at it, but for most of us; don't worry about what other people give credit to. It's an exercise in futility. My own way of dealing with it was to use the most DIY stuff for lighting I could make (even though I have all the good stuff) just to mess with people who snicker, until they see the back of the camera. It's petty of me, but the reactions are priceless when they start to give you instant respect. People crediting the camera are just making it about themselves so they can have an excuse as to why they can't do it. Ignore them. They're just having a bad....life.
A GREAT photographer sees what the normal eye doesn't, in this case, you see much more than I will ever see & I'm amazed at the angles, the lighting, the emotion in each. No, it's not the camera, it's the person with the magical eyes, behind the camera, that takes all the credit. Kudos & thanks for sharing!
Ansel Adams cameras were not as good as that you can find today, but his vision and his dark room editing( IE processing) is what made his pictures. While good equipment can help, it is still the person behind the camera to make good photos. While visiting the museum I saw his prints, the one thing I wished was that they show a couple of straight prints to show his actual vision.
What is wrong with you anyway? A real photographer would've taken the photos with a $12.99 (for two no less) Fuji disposable camera and would have at least had that cheap camera be the last photo in this montage.
If you take my Fuji disposable camera challenge, here is a link - Walmart - https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fujifilm-Disposable-35mm-Camera-With-Flash-2-Pack/11019775 . 20b7e790-5...38ab4.jpeg
I don't know. Photoshop does help alot, whether you use a cheap or expensive lens. Other than that, your vision is still great and I love what you've done.
It's nice stuff, and i like the point you're trying to make, but Photoshop subscriptions are exactly the kind of money that people who are not professional photographers cannot generally afford to justify along with the rest of their monthly expenses.
I use Photoshop and Lightroom every single day. It is a very powerful tool for the price. Anybody can afford $2.50 a week! We spend more than that on snacks cigarets or whatever else we can/should probably live without anyway! I literally don't even miss the $2.50 a week!
Load More Replies... I shoot with analog cameras, and this photo was taken with smena 8m that cost me just $ 5... F1000030-5...5a3b3a.jpg
*cough cough b******t cough* You went out and bought an exceptionally good camera from 2010, then used professional software to edit your shots. This does little to convince me that you are a 'great photographer.' I am not disputing for even a moment that the photographer makes the image, however the use of professional equipment cheapens your point. I took the following sunset photo with a Sony Cybershot from Goodwill ($3): dsc04120_2...365258.jpg
I didn’t say it was easy to do or that the equipment was nonprofessional. The Canon t2i is an amazing camera for the price. And there is a learning curve to taking great photos and using professional editing software. You still have to put the work into it. My point is that you don’t have to pay an arm and a leg or sell a kidney so you can afford expensive equipment. I want to make this as easy and cheap for beginning photographers as possible. That’s why I made the course and that's why I'm giving it away for free! This is the stuff I wish someone told me when I started out in 2015. So I’m just paying it forward.
Load More Replies... If anyone actually wants a good quality and affordable 10 in 1 Phone Lens Kit, I just bought this one at https://aweandco.com/products/10-in-1-phone-lens-kit and it is honestly awesome!
I am not that much of a photographer, but it is really kind of irritating to hear smth like: "What a nice photo! Your camera is unexpectedly good for its size!" etc. etc. Indeed. I do understand the author of the post.
Okay, it still has something to do with the camera - there are cameras which one could buy for less than $100 - but they take awful, low-resolution photos which would require extreme editing not to look fatal. But of course, the actual photography art is a combination of the photographing skills, the technology used (camera) and the editing skills (if the photo is actually edited). If you're a bad photographer, your photos might possibly still look bad, even when holding a camera which costs some thousand dollars.
I think that it's cute that you think that $200 is cheap. Let's use your cell phone or a $50 camera. I do agree that to some degree it is taking the time to envision what you want to create. Figuring out lighting and angles, color and perspective is just as important as having the right equipment.
I wouldn't down your photography because the photos look great. But I'm from a different era where if you wanted a pic like this, you had to get out at 4 in the morning, gather some tin foil and a toothpick and six other odd items, put a sheet up over something, add one more lens, maybe try some plastic wrap, then wait for the absolute right light and finally, finally you got the photo you envisioned. If you weren't creative and willing to go to great lengths like that, you didn't get the great photos. That's what people mean when they talk about great photography being an art. Having watched some folks going that extra mile, being so very innovative, and struggling to achieve great photos in the past, I tend to look at photoshop and other fix it programs as cheating but truth be told I bet any one of those older photographers would love to have had photoshop as an aid back then. But either way, you can't this from a CHEAP camera.
I just think what difference does it make what kind of camera you are using if the pictures are going to be photoshop'd within and inch of their life? They are very beautiful, though. Good job.
I am a professional photographer too and here all I can see is a very good advertising strategy, that's all! Congrats! I too agree that if you don't have the eye to see what needs to captured, than it's irrelevant what camera gear you use, but after reading what do you consider a cheap camera and lense (Canon t2i and a Pentax 50mm 1.7 lens) my first thought was that these photos will be as good as any other photos you took, with a more expensive gear! I understand that the price for the equipment was cheap, but the lense is a VERY good one. Try to shoot these, or any other thing with a worse camera (a point-and-shoot) and if you use a DSLR, than use the worst lense (18-55mm) and DON'T edit them in photoshop. That's what I would expect after reading the title.
I agree with you. I have a 1970's F3 that I shoot film through, and although its 40 years old, the lenses are scratched and the shutter is slow, its the eye of the photographer that knows how to set the image, look at the light, figure out the direction of motion, looks, eyes, body position, natural positions etc. The camera allows for capturing more than we ever could before, but it still takes the artist to see the image and make the camera do the work.
I must agree with you. It is not the camera. The camera does not frame the picture or find the shot. That requires the eye of the shooter and sometimes a little luck for the shot. People have been taking amazing pictures for years and years. Some of the best and most candid shots I have seen were taken with an 120 film camera. With any hobby, you can do very good work, as long as you are aware of the capabilities and limitations of the equipment you use. I think of the difference in woodworkers.. There are workers that have invested thousands of dollars in all sorts of power equipment that can accurately build a piece of furniture in a short amount of time. Then you have the ones that use all hand tools and create the same furniture, but may take days. Is one necessarily better than the other,?It is just a matter of knowing yourself, and the equipment that you use. Please keep up the excellent work.
Most of the very best pictures I've ever seen (and taken) were with a cheap SLR and cheap lens. The key is knowing how to use a camer's features, light and composition. Some of the worst pictures I've ever seen were taken with expensive smartphone "cameras". The worse SLR is still superior to the best smartphone. Phone pushers know that, that's why they're pushing attachments to make their pathetic smartphone cameras more SLR-like. The problem is when all you as a picture viewer see is smartphone c**p, you begin to thing it's actually good.
A good photographer can capture an image with pretty much anything. A good camera brings better technical quality to the images, but that's pretty much it. A bad pose, bad lighting choice, wrong focal and aperture setting, wrong angle, doesn't get magically "fixed" by a better camera, nor does a better camera make a bad photographer automatically better. The photographer has an idea what s(he) wants to achieve, and once that is set, the gear makes less of a difference.
Great photos, but would you mind posting an overview of your PP workflow? I'd be very interested to see the difference between the out-of-camera shots and the final images. You certainly have talent though, that's for sure. I've been shooting digital for more than 10 years, and some of my best shots were on my lowly 500D with the kit lens when I started.
Cheapest camera has no lens, it is a coffee can with a hole in it. Pinhole cameras in general can cost $2-$5 to make.
Isn't a $200 camera (specially if it costs that second handed) a professional camera already? When I think cheap I think of cameras that don't even take lenses and even those tend to get too expensive. And then... I wonder how these photos looked just as photos, no editing. Editing is a whole other realm of skill and one can get the most plain looking photo and make something unbelievable out of it as long as they have enough skill, right? So with that I have two things to say, 1, this post doesn't prove anything, if you want to prove something to the regular people, use regular items, most regular Joe's don't even know why a camera uses a lense. 2 and most important, if you know your skill and you believe in your work, don't worry about what other people think. Do what you do best and let other's opinions just pass by.
You can do it cheaper Phillip,... Try out CHDK on a Canon Ixus - All the raw and Magic Lantern style features, on a point-n-shoot. They can be fantastic little cameras when you need to travel light.
Why do you believe film vs digital would make a difference?
Load More Replies... I would like to say firstly that to concern yourself with peoples’ comments IS part of todays life, why justify. I say this as i am a well established Specialist Artists,& in many areas. I create photos with extremely limited equipments, no considered real cameras & i literally create lighting & ‘made effects’ to blend into the picture~ I’ve done this for over 35 years & i still use the same methods for my advertising/s...& i constantly get accused of using ALL THIS STUFF’! I srug my shoulders & say ‘whatever’..& usually the same people want my Arts’ as they can not figure how i do things~ thats the REALITY. Understand most get annoyed when they cant figure out certian elements of your own abilities, thus you see, what i call, the mask falls off the individuals. That word is forgotten too; digital world has created lots of paranioa/& for good/bad reasons. Never feel you must explain yourself to anybody as it will only put more demands on you to apease some very stupid humaniods:) 😌
Very nicely done but I have to say, some of the photo quality credit does go to the camera. I have a fairly old iPod that takes very blurry, pixelated photos. Even if I found the perfect angle and lighting, it could still be much nicer. I realize that it isn't a proper camera but it is very convenient for travel and I wish it took nicer photos. Though I also have a very nice, fairly new Sony camera, which takes photos that are absolutely incredible in comparison. They are quite nice photos, regardless, I think. I still edit photos from both cameras but my Sony ones are always nicer, before and after editing. You make a good point that you don't need a ridiculously expensive camera to shoot nice photos but it certainly helps.
When Kai Man Wong was still at Digital Rev he did a series "Pro Photographers, cheap camera challenges" where a pro photographer was given the cheapest camera he could find to take photos in the streets of Hongkong. And with "cheap" he ment really really crappy. Watch Chase Jarvis come to grips with a Lego camera, fashion photograper Lara Jade with a An Pan Man camera and Phil Bloom with a Barbie camera https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7ECB90D96DF59DE5 It's true: a good (professional) photographer can take good pictures with any camera turning its limits in his favour. A bad photographer can't take really good pictures no matter how expensive his camera. (And I myself am probably a good example of the latter)
Chase Jarvis did a project titled "the best camera is the one that's with you" around the camera in the I-phone https://www.chasejarvis.com/project/the-best-camera/ When Kai Man Wong was still with Digital Rev he did a series "Pro Photographer Cheap Camera challenge" where he sent a professional photographer into the streets of Hongkong with a - sometimes very very - cheap camera. Including Chase Jarvis with a Lego camera, fashion photographer Lara Jade with a An Pan Man camera and Phil Bloom with a Barbie camera! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv0n52-ncmg&list=PL7ECB90D96DF59DE5 It's true: a good photographer can make decent to very good shots with any camera. All it takes is to come to grips with and get used to the limitations. Bad photographers with expensive camera's is a different story (I myself am probably a good example of that) In the end it's still the person behind the viewfinder who creates the pictures.
"I remember when"... there was no adobe corp. and we only had "Darkroom"
I used to sell my photographs. I started out with a Kodak Instamatic 44 Made in the U.S.A. then I bought a canon AE1.. the thing I always heard was... well, anybody can take a picture.. it's another thing to actually paint. I would tell them that anybody can paint a picture. they can paint it in their living room.. but I have to go out and FIND a picture and it has to be the perfect opportunity to sell that picture. I had people buying my photographs so they could paint them.
I worked as a lithographer for 18 years and developed my photographic skills since I was 10 years old. My original camera is a 65-year-old Agfa Gevaert box camera. I have several Canon cameras and others. The "cheap" one is a decades old Canon G9. It's small and light weight, so it's easy to carry when I do my early morning 10-mile walk at a nearby lake. I also have a Canon 10D, 40D and a 60D. (I have no reason to upgrade at this point in life.) The quality of the Agfa Gevaert and G9 is easily equal to the quality of the Canon Ds. It's been my experience that the lens is the determining factor for quality. If the image captured by the lens is poor, the most expensive, high quality camera in the world cannot make up the difference.
Great work man and Proved your point "Skills matters more then Equipment to capture a moment" :)
Good Photography and i will learn from your course. People also say to those "if you Brought NEW DSLR you are not a Photographer" - An amerture has to began the photography from start. Those who mock the new photographers - are not owning the camera or interest, just they spend time in useless by mocking others. And you said you have done photoshop/lightroom - yes photographers do. Even they shoot raw, they have to do some correction. Good post phillip
You have a beautiful eye! I love your use of light and shadow and the intimacy and emotional connections you create in these photos. I love photography and aspire to improve my techniques. Any words of wisdom or suggestions for an amateur?
Thank you so much Monica! I packed my free course with as much info as I could offer a beginner. You should check it out! ;)
Load More Replies... I think people shouldn't instantly hate on people as soon as they do something good, they should see true art and passion instead of a fancy camera, not all photos are good because of the camera but because of the one who created the photos
siple techniques, use spaciing in the composure, make the object not too far away or too close unless thats what you want to covey, then have good lghting, hazy cloudy/bright days work best to cast soft light, and its easiest to edit in post because its clean lighting. thats two of the main points of shooting the next is editing in the mood, mood has to do with red and blue because red is happy intense and bright, blue is dark and sad and somber. add a vignette to darken the edges of the photo, add gold or yellow hues to make it feel rustic, pump up the contrast and exposure, after that every photo you take will look pretty good, dont over do it
It's a $9.99 a month subscription. You actually get more than just Photoshop and Lightroom, and you get all of the updates/upgrades they come up with. It's completely worth it for me!
Load More Replies... The photos are great. You are a great photographer. How do you make everything blurry/fuzzy around the main subject?
It's the lens that creates the blurry background and foreground. The lens has a wide aperture, that's what the 1.7 is. The wider the aperture the more blur you get.
Load More Replies... This goes to show that its not always the camera, but instead its who is holding it and what they can do with it in the same way that Formula 1 drivers have nearly identical cars yet look what a difference Ayrton Senna, Jackie Stewart, Michael Schumacher, Lewis Hamilton and Sebastien Vettel can do with their skills set.
first off: you are a great photographer. a hammer is just a hammer without the skill of a carpenter. second: $200 is nowhere near "inexpensive" for a non pro setup. sorry. your very talented but you failed to make the point you set out to make to the people you intended to make it. again your point is valid. you just failed to make it.
I have seen some of these pics on other posts here on BP. Something to do with photoshop or maybe cheap camera professional photographer. Either way, bravo!
I distinctly remember it too, i think was the same subject matter just worded different.
Load More Replies... Thank you Tih Nicastro! I used a Canon t2i with a Pentax 50mm 1.7 lens.
Load More Replies... I am no expert, but I do love taking photos and I know it's not the equipment that makes you a good photographer but the ability to create using your eyes/brain, composition and lighting are of course hugely important too! Wonderful subject.
THese are nice but a better camera would have made them .........better
Beautiful pictures. It must be irritating when people think the camera does all the work - the right tools help, but tools are nothing without the creative mind behind them. You, sir, are incredible :)
My, you made a bargain to find such a great camera for under 200$! ;)
First, you don't owe anyone an explanation or response to negative bs they're tossing your way. Second, your boys are absolutely gorgeous as is your photography. I once looked at Photoshop and it just looked like a bunch of scary, confusing things. Why wouldn't an artist use any tool they needed to get to the end result of their vision? Meh, people really suck nowadays, so brave behind the screen and hammering away negativity on their keyboards. Keep doing your thing, it's beautiful.
Well..you have to develop photographic film when it's out of camera, same with digital film. Digitally developing gives quite a lot more options and requires less dirty work then film though.
Load More Replies...
471
177