What can be classified as a pro camera?

[pdechavez]

A lot of people say that glass matters more than the body. What makes the Canon XSi a consumer as opposed to the 40D and the 40D a semi-pro as opposed to the 1D Mark iii? The materials used to make the camera? the convenience of more buttons and ease of usability? Since consumer cameras are slowly reaching pro features, wont all SLR cameras one day be classified as standard for pro photography?

[jhamerphoto]

In a word? price

A little more in-depth, it takes speed, resolution, file handling, extras, probably full-frame format, flexibility and ergonomics. Essentially the more a camera company can pack into a single camera body, the closer it becomes towards "pro".

Pro technology is always going to be more expensive and advanced than consumer technology, which separates the boys from the men. Consumer technology will never catch up to pro technology, so a separation can be maintained. Does the average soccer mom need a Canon 1Ds MkIII? I highly doubt it, nor would she spend that kind of cash.

Ultimately, it comes down to:
consumer to semi-pro: user makes purchase
pro: user writes off purchase, or has company purchase for him :D

[jag0009]

Pro cameras - metal frame, more weatherproof, large capacity battery, more features, higher # of shots in continuous shooting mode and maybe 100 % viewfinder?

[ipodtoucher]

One more word, Sensor

Pro cameras like the D3 have a full 35mm sensor. Like a Nikon D50 with a 50mm f/1.8 is actually cropped to about 87mm and with a pro camera it is a full 50mm.

A pro camera can use a high ISO and have little noise which helps....

Some pro cameras also have an extra memory slot so some have a SD and a CF slot, or two CF slots...

Hope this helps.... There really are big differences between a $500 camera and a $5000 camera :cool:

[miloblithe]

Build (durability/reliability). Everything else is secondary.

(edit: unless you're talking studio cameras like the Hasselblad, in which case it's resolution).

[Abstract]

Build (durability/reliability). Everything else is secondary.


I'll agree with this opinion. ;)


Build quality, marketing, and continuous shooting speed (frames per second). Some may say high ISO performance, but every DSLR does pretty well at it, and expensive cameras don't necessarily give you better ISO performance. It's a technical issue that's shared by both low-end and high-end cameras.

I've seen pros use Canon 40Ds, and up until very recently, it was the second worst DSLR in the Canon DSLR lineup (although the 1000D hasn't been released yet, so I guess it's still second worst). Is it a pro camera? Yes, I'd consider it a pro camera for most tasks, but I guess if you're going to go to Iraq and take photos, then it's not a pro camera. It really depends on what you're photographing. More often than not, it's just a marketing gimmick.

[apearlman]

Professionals are people who earn their living at photography.
Pro cameras are any cameras that are used by these people.

Some cameras are more popular among professional photographers than others,
but any decent camera -- certainly any DSLR -- can produce moneymaking images in the right hands.

[pdechavez]

Professionals are people who earn their living at photography.
Pro cameras are any cameras that are used by these people.

Some cameras are more popular among professional photographers than others,
but any decent camera -- certainly any DSLR -- can produce moneymaking images in the right hands.

I agree with your last sentence. Where would you classify the Sony Alpha A350? Its got awesome features and so much tech packed into one camera, all thats missing are the body materials and the sensor frame size. I dont really consider the shooting speed a major asset but i bought this camera and it tkes amazing shots at 14.2MP so it prints extremely well, large images, packed with a ton of features. So, what u guys think?

Thanx

[miles01110]

I would say any "professional" not using a full-frame camera isn't taking his profession very seriously.

[pdechavez]

I would say any "professional" not using a full-frame camera isn't taking his profession very seriously.

I dont believe that because many professional photographers used the Canon EOS 1D Mark III and it wasnt full frame but an APS-H sensor which was a 1.3x crop. It was awarded as the best camera in its class so many times and even though people have their opinions, its not the camera but the photographer who makes the art.

[netdog]

It depends on the application too.

An M8 is certainly a pro camera, but it doesn't fit some of the requirements outlined above.

Despite the Megapixel race, which is thankfully slowing down, the ability of a camera and lens to resolve a sharp clear image is essential. This is where even a 4/3 camera like the Digilux 3 excels and many Nikon and Canon lenses do not regardless of the body.

Pro Cameras that come to mind...

Nikon D3, maybe D700?
Canon 1D, maybe 5D?
Leica M8 (primarily for street shooting, photojournalism)
Hassleblad (primarily for studio work)

[miles01110]

I dont believe that because many professional photographers used the Canon EOS 1D Mark III and it wasnt full frame but an APS-H sensor which was a 1.3x crop. It was awarded as the best camera in its class so many times and even though people have their opinions, its not the camera but the photographer who makes the art.

Oh right, I forgot about the 1D-III. But anyway, for many professional-level applications (large billboards, posters, etc.) a cropped sensor won't give you acceptable results. In that case it will indeed matter what camera you're using.

[OreoCookie]

Oh right, I forgot about the 1D-III. But anyway, for many professional-level applications (large billboards, posters, etc.) a cropped sensor won't give you acceptable results. In that case it will indeed matter what camera you're using.
You're painting with a very broad brush.
I'd rather say that for large billboards, you need high resolution which, a priori, is not related to sensor size at all. (Some pictures for the acclaimed Pirelli calender were shot with a D70.)

What is and isn't a professional camera depends largely on what the photographer does. Built quality and viewfinder size are a big factor in my opinion, image quality not nearly as much. (The D700 uses the same sensor as the D3, the D80 uses the same sensor as the D200, Canon's 450D has more megapixels than the 40D.) But other than that, I wouldn't make one badge `professional' that I'd put on certain cameras and not others, I'd rather look at the application and then look for a suitable camera. In my opinion, a professionally used camera shouldn't limit the photographer, if technically possible.

[netdog]

I'd rather look at the application and then look for a suitable camera. In my opinion, a professionally used camera shouldn't limit the photographer, if technically possible.

That is a very important aspect of defining what camera is appropriate in a professional situation. I agree.

[Phrasikleia]

It's all relative. A decade ago "pro" cameras had sensors and features that were far inferior to those now inside entry-level models...and they cost ten times more. The Nikon D1 was the king of the hill in its day (1999), but had only a 2.74 megapixel DX sensor, 5-point AF, shot 4.5 frames/s and cost nearly $6,000.

[pdechavez]

But in reality, all cameras have their ups and downs. The new Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III has a huge 21MP full frame sensor but cant be used as well for sports as the 1D mark iii because of the slower burst shooting at just 5Frames as opposed to 10frames on the 1D MIII. The Nikon D3, in my opinion, is the superior one since it can shoot 9Frames at full frame but only has a maximum of 12 MP and can switch to its DX mode and shoot 11 frames. And 3000 dollars cheaper than the Canon EOS 1DS Mark III.

Im waiting for the new alpha coming out since it is going to be a full frame 24mp camera and hopefully shoots on par with the Nikon D3.

[Apple Ink]

DSLR

Its not a typo but only the SLR part is intentionally bolded!

[OreoCookie]

DSLR

Its not a typo but only the SLR part is intentionally bolded!
What about rangefinder cameras? Are they not professional?

[Stiksi]

Professional cameras are the models that are targeted at professional photographers by any given manufacturer's marketing department. Professional photographers are the people, who take pictures for a living. The two don't necessarily have anything to do with each other.

You can't define a professional camera by features, it's already defined for you, but usually it's a good clue that the (dslr) camera isn't targeted at consumers when the only automatic exposure modes are A, S and P.

As a professional, I use what is most cost-effective. Since I'm a freelancer, it's never the most expensive model. 90 % of the Nikons I see on the field at the moment are D200:s.

Sorry for the semantics nitpicking.

[harcosparky]

A lot of people say that glass matters more than the body. What makes the Canon XSi a consumer as opposed to the 40D and the 40D a semi-pro as opposed to the 1D Mark iii? The materials used to make the camera? the convenience of more buttons and ease of usability? Since consumer cameras are slowly reaching pro features, wont all SLR cameras one day be classified as standard for pro photography?

Construction and functionality.

Pro cameras will always have more functionality and be constructed in such as way as to take much more heavier levels of use.

Canon knows a 1DS/5D and maybe even the 40D will be used on an almost daily basis in various environments and designs it to handle such use.

When an individuals income is on the line, and they need THAT shot .... they will take it, even if it means shooting in the rain.

Would I take a Rebel out on the beach for two weeks shooting on a daily basis? No way, but I did take my 5D and 40D out with me the last two weeks. I took out the 40D with an " L " series lens, two of them to be exact. Why the " L " lens? Because they too are designed to be used in less than ideal conditions.

I shoot over 7,000 images in two weeks on vacation just " goofing around ".

I was shooting beach volley ball players, birds, boats, US Navy fighter jets and other planes in flight ( jets were the most challenging as they came up unexpectedly and only flew by once ), sunrises, sunsets, bright moons over the ocean. It was a great opportunity to get a lot of practice shooting in many different conditions. I had a blast, and made quite a few new friends in the process.

[Apple Ink]

What about rangefinder cameras? Are they not professional?

In respect to this thread, I really doubt that the OP would be interested in one of those!

[OreoCookie]

In respect to this thread, I really doubt that the OP would be interested in one of those!
The OP's original question was `what makes a camera a professional camera' and not `what's a good camera for me that's professional.' But even then, I'd ask what the OP does instead of blindly suggesting something. E. g. Nikon's D40 or Canon's 400D are dslrs, but I doubt many professionals use them (as primary bodies).

All this shows that if we try to look for a single badge `professional' that we give only if a camera satisfies certain criteria, someone finds a camera that's not a consumer camera and doesn't satisfy all criteria.

[Apple Ink]

The OP's original question was `what makes a camera a professional camera' and not `what's a good camera for me that's professional.' But even then, I'd ask what the OP does instead of blindly suggesting something.

I believe that the OP has clearly indicated his tastes in regard to the subject and the question he goes on to ask! All the examples he provides in the opening post are proof enough!:)

[OreoCookie]

I believe that the OP has clearly indicated his tastes in regard to the subject and the question he goes on to ask! All the examples he provides in the opening post are proof enough!:)
The question is not a matter of taste in a particular type of camera. Just because his taste is Canon, for example, doesn't mean we should not mention Hasselblad or Nikon, although he may not be interested in buying one of them.

In any case, all I was trying to say that your remark that any professional camera is a dslr is incorrect. And that is independent of whether the OP wants to buy a dslr or any other type of camera.

[Edge100]

I would say any "professional" not using a full-frame camera isn't taking his profession very seriously.

HUH? I guarantee that virutally every picture you see in any recent edition of Sports Illustrated is taken with either a Canon 1D mkII, 1D mkIII, or Nikon D300, none of which are full-frame cameras.

[Hmac]

"Professional" camera appears to have a wide variety of definitions, but the general connotation is a camera with features and build quality that are commensurate with what one generally supposes the average professional photographer's needs, and that tends to first revolve around ruggedness/durability, since the average pro is generally presumed to be harder on his/her equipment than the average non-pro. Certainly I've seen it to be generally true that professional photographers look at their cameras as a tool by which they ply their trade. Non-pros have a tendency to wring their hands over every little scratch or acquired cosmetic defect (broadly generalizing here).

We can say that it's "any camera that a professional uses", but that doesn't reflect the reality of the various market segments.

[Apple Ink]

The question is not a matter of taste in a particular type of camera. Just because his taste is Canon, for example, doesn't mean we should not mention Hasselblad or Nikon, although he may not be interested in buying one of them.

In any case, all I was trying to say that your remark that any professional camera is a dslr is incorrect. And that is independent of whether the OP wants to buy a dslr or any other type of camera.

When I said 'taste' I meant the breed of camers to which he was referring!

Also, consider this:

You come to this forum and ask members to define a 'smartphone' and give an example of iPhone! So should I respond with palm, treo and the Q or a satellite phone?

[OreoCookie]

You come to this forum and ask members to define a 'smartphone' and give an example of iPhone! So should I respond with palm, treo and the Q or a satellite phone?
All of them, with the possible exception of a satellite phones are smart phones. So, yes, I don't see a reason why you shouldn't bring them up. (Rangefinder cameras have already been brought up by someone else before.)

[Apple Ink]

I dont want to drag this but I have always, do and will always prefer to only respond with respect to the topic! I never wrote in my post that DSLRs are the ONLY pro cameras but since he was simply heading in that direction... I kindly pointed it out to him!

Im sorry if you think Ive made a mistake (which I certainly dont). My apologies!

P.S.: Current satellite phones can edit all Office files and mail and other stuff so I believe that it's fine! And my point was.... you expect something like iPhone when I define smartphone but some one suggests a sat phone!

[atlanticza]

I would think that the range of lenses available is one mark of difference between an amateur and a pro camera.

[costabunny]

In my experience a professionl DSLR is one which has a rugged build quality, can run on multiple power sources, has expert features like colour space selection and bit depth, shoots in RAW, and has a high quality sensor with low noise at higher ISO's

Thats my interpretation of the 'Pro' model anyways :)

(Thats why I use a D300 (used to use an EOS1 and F4s in my film days)

[Edge100]

I would think that the range of lenses available is one mark of difference between an amateur and a pro camera.

I can stick a an EF 400/F2.8L on a Rebel XT just as easily as I can stick it on a 1Ds mkIII.

That having been said, I agree that the lenses being used are a huge determinant of whether the results are "pro" or not.

[tip]

What makes the Canon XSi a consumer as opposed to the 40D and the 40D a semi-pro as opposed to the 1D Mark iii? The materials used to make the camera? the convenience of more buttons and ease of usability? Since consumer cameras are slowly reaching pro features, wont all SLR cameras one day be classified as standard for pro photography?

In a word: Marketing.

[filmamigo]

I would say any "professional" not using a full-frame camera isn't taking his profession very seriously.



Sometimes you guys make me laugh.

apearlman is the only one who has it right. "Pro" has nothing to do with frame rate or sensor size, unless the professional behind the lens says so.

Check out Benjamin Kanarek.
http://www.pressbook.com/homebook.asp?owner_id=5144&langue_id=2&style_id=&admin=&guest=

Here's a world-class fashion photog, whose shots end up on magazine covers, billboards, posters... He's shooting Pentax (first K10D and now K20D.) Some people rule out these cameras because they don't have blazing fast frame rates. And they are APS-C cameras. But to Benjamin Kanarek, they are clearly professional.

Now, you can speak more meaningfully about amateur/professional inside one manufacturer's lineup. For Pentax, the K10D/K20D are targetted to pros. No wonky point-and-shoot modes, dual control dials. Of course, Pentax "amateur" SLRs have features that Nikon/Canon reserve for their professional models (weather sealing, mirror lockup, image stabilization.) So the lines are always blurry.

Don't forget that many professional photographers like to blur those lines. They will use any camera they want to achieve a look. Check out the work of David Burnett, who will use a Holga or an ancient Speed Graphic 4x5.
http://www.davidburnett.com/index.html

[ChrisA]

A lot of people say that glass matters more than the body. What makes the Canon XSi a consumer as opposed to the 40D and the 40D a semi-pro as opposed to the 1D Mark iii? The materials used to make the camera?

There is no such thing as a "pro" camera. No matter what people say. A pro-camera is any camera that a pro uses.

I know that there are quite a few (no, a great many) "professional" wedding photographers who use simple point and shoots. These people work at the low end and offer to do an entire wedding package, prints included for $50. They are "pros" because they do photography for money not because of their skill.

What Nikon and Canon do is offer cameras at various price points. They know that when people shop for a camera they pretend to do some kind of objective analysis but really they don't. They simply buy whatever they can afford. (They say "I've got $900, give me a $900 camera.") So they offer cameras for every budget. Professionals (some of them) simply have larger budgets or can justify spending more because the camera generate income.

[jbernie]

Two ways to view this:

1) Purely from a hardware perspective I would expect that cameras such as the Canon 1D series or Nikon D300 bodies with Canon L series or Nikon equivalent glass is the minimum setup that would be accepted as "Pro".

2) Any camera that is used to produce an image that is not for personal use. Horses for courses. Just because you used a P&S camera to get the image doesn't make it any less "pro" if the image is used for commercial purposes. It really comes down to how the image is used and what tools are available/practical at the time.

You probably wont get the shot for the freeway billboard with your 6mp P&S camera, but you may not be able to get a close up shot in a very tight environment with your DSLR if you can't even see the object you are trying to shoot.

[Kebabselector]

There is no such thing as a "pro" camera. No matter what people say. A pro-camera is any camera that a pro uses.

Sums it up really, i've seen plenty of people with top models (D2/D3 1D/1DS etc) with no idea what they are doing. Though the positive side to this is, these people often get fed up and sell their 'pro kit' cos it's not good enough (hence good 2nd hand bargains!).

[cube]

- Point & click white balance
- Dual card slots
- 100% viewfinder, nowadays.

So, the D700 fails.

[jag0009]

One more word, Sensor

Pro cameras like the D3 have a full 35mm sensor. Like a Nikon D50 with a 50mm f/1.8 is actually cropped to about 87mm and with a pro camera it is a full 50mm.

A pro camera can use a high ISO and have little noise which helps....

Some pro cameras also have an extra memory slot so some have a SD and a CF slot, or two CF slots...

Hope this helps.... There really are big differences between a $500 camera and a $5000 camera :cool:

Nope. Nikon D1(and x) and D2(and x) are pro cameras and they don't have fullframe.

[seenew]

There are too many big egos on this board.

[pdechavez]

I believe the new Nikon D700 is a budget oriented PRO camera since it has almost all the features of the D3 in a small package of the D300. Also it is 2000 dollars cheaper than the D3...

[cube]

The only acceptable criterion to consider the D700 a pro camera is that it comes with Nikon PRO support.

[Renderz]

There are too many big egos on this board.

I agree.

[atlanticza]

A lot of people say that glass matters more than the body. What makes the Canon XSi a consumer as opposed to the 40D and the 40D a semi-pro as opposed to the 1D Mark iii? The materials used to make the camera? the convenience of more buttons and ease of usability? Since consumer cameras are slowly reaching pro features, wont all SLR cameras one day be classified as standard for pro photography?

Curse the day that someone or an ad agency coined the term "prosumer" - the same vociferous debate exists in digital video forums. If you sell your wares - and it's acceptable by magazine editors/TV stations, and it's your main source of income - then you're using a pro camera/video camera. Chances of sale are, however, more likely with an expensive kit. On the other hand, possessing a pro camera (and we do know what they are) will not guarantee an income, unless you are a pro yourself.

[Edge100]

In a word: Marketing.

Dude! One click of the shutter on a 1D-series camera will show you just how superior they are to Canon's XXXD or XXD-series cameras.

'Pro' means a whole lot more than just megapixels, or even just strict IQ.

[costabunny]

I believe the new Nikon D700 is a budget oriented PRO camera since it has almost all the features of the D3 in a small package of the D300. Also it is 2000 dollars cheaper than the D3...

Small? I wouldnt say the D300 chassis is small - its a lovely weighty, solid chassis, but small?

I cant use those iddy biddy DSLR's that seem to be popular these days. Keep worrying I am gonna break em! - thats why I love my D300. (Only reason I'd trade for a D3 would be for the full frame and less places for dust/moisture to creep in - (there is no seam around the 'grip'). Tho saying the D300 is pretty rugged in my experience (only had it for maybe 6 months)


Hey I am a girl and let me tell you that sometimes SIZE does matter ;)

[Macanadian]

I agree.

I took a course in Wedding photography a couple of months ago. The instructor's gear included a 12 megapixel Canon, 15 inch Mac Pro Laptop, CS2, zoom lens was 28-200'ish at F4 (not 2.8), 50mm macro lens and shot in jpg. The guy charges upwards of 10,000 per wedding.

Sure you can buy a Pro camera, but it takes practice, practice and practice.

[monokakata]

rangefinders...a really long time ago (sixties) i was paying my rent by photography. i had a couple of Nikon F bodies, good Nikkor lenses. All very nice. But my girlfriend had a Leica M3 she inherited from her dad and i used to use it when i wanted to be unobtrusive. quiet, fast. didn't cartier-bresson favor rangefinder cameras? and the glass on that leica was amazing. in my darkroom i could see the kind of negatives the leica normal lens produced. edge to edge resolution, contast, wow. it beat my nikkors, though not by much. it was a real joy to print those negatives.

i guess i'm taking off on the implication that rangefinder = inferior camera. Maybe now, but definitely not then. Less versatile than an SLR, yes, but sometimes totally the Right Tool For The Job, which is what being a pro is all about, isn't it? Knowing which tool is the right one?

[MacNoobie]

I think what classifies a pro camera as a pro camera is when it appeals to the professionals out there in terms of the features it offers and is actually designed by the company while listening to the pro's that use it.

[pdechavez]

Well, i realized somthing today that could at least classify it as a NON consumer camera. The fact that higher end DSLRs have no automatic modes like the portrait, sunset, macro, landscape and AUTO mode. Since more "EXPERIENCED" photographers know what to do, higher end DSLRs have eliminated all these auto modes.


What you guys think?