I bet you CAN’T tell the difference…
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- Join challenge to see if you can distinguish Sony A7 Mark V with affordable telephoto lens vs A7 Mark I with premium lens in "I bet you CAN’T tell the difference…". Subscribe for captivating camera gear content!
Looking for some FREE Lightroom Presets...?
☞ advntrswithmar...
UPDATE: Check the linked video for SIDE BY SIDE, UNEDITED COMPARISON
Subscribe if you agree that gear doesn't matter!
This aims to prove you don't have to have expensive equipment to take great photos. Often when starting out, beginners can be overwhelmed with the gear options provided and swayed by creators, like myself, who own expensive equipment, to think that to get the same or similar results, you MUST have this set-up. That couldn't be further from the truth. The best camera is the one you have and learning its strengths and weaknesses is what forces you to think creatively about the choices you make.
Oh and just have fun with it, yeah? We're all artists doing the same thing. Making memories doing something we love.
I also have a Preset Pack available and some other FREE goodies to help with your editing process ☞ Check my channel links
A few things to quickly note as well:
- I was able to pick up the A7 MK1 for around $500AUD used with two lenses and SD cards, which is why it’s cheap. I understand prices are different so your mileage may vary.
- I edit my shots. All of them. The comparison isn’t meant to showcase who is better in terms of RAW performance but rather represents a final product you might see out in the wild. Knowing whether a more affordable lens option could take a fantastic photo and seeing the end product, was absolutely vital to me back then being (and still being) a broke photographer.
Again, I also have a Preset Pack available and some other FREE goodies to help with your editing process ☞ Check my channel links ❤️
Can't tell the difference cause you edited both pics with grain, why not just show us the raw image and put them side by side
@@billybob2793 Ah, I totally get where you're coming from! It's been a common request, and I totally understand why. 😄 Just wanted to clarify the aim of this series: it's all about showing beginner photographers that you don't need pricey gear to capture amazing shots. It's about finding those affordable alternatives that can perform just as well and fit within a budget. So, while I can't provide raw images post-upload, I hope the final products still showcase that message. It's all about empowering others to realize their potential with what they have. Thanks for your understanding!
Can you do the differences between Sony and canon and which are good models that not too high in price
ad an 85/1.2 to a cheap apsc camera, then try a crop sensor 15-45/5.6 kens on a full frame, you'll see the difference. anyways, yes, cheap cameras well used can create good results ut for newies it won't make much of a difference, they must learn to use the camera, lens, flash, composition etc. and most users don't have 12+ adc monitors, won't see anything different at all.
I can't tell you now, cuz I only have a cheap camera with a cheap lens😂
😂😂 nothing wrong with cheap and affordable gear! Gotta work with what you’ve got. It forces you to find creative solutions to problems and I’m all for it!
I only have webcam. May have good comparison
@phamnhuthai6847 don’t tempt me because I’ll do it
@@advntrswithmarley I have my legendry Galaxy ON MAX🗿
(without manual focus 😭)
@advntrswithmarley you realize the sensors aren't that different...ur paying for features. Obviously a better lens is the better option. Just deceptive to try and make a point you want to get across? Or ur ignorant? Also, how the hell do you expect people to compare those photos? Stupid video, my friend. Get a job for sure. don't stick to this as a career option.
i can’t tell because you added crazy amounts of film grain
Good. I tried to match them as close as I could. Even though the grain is a stylistic choice, the fact you can’t tell them apart is great. That’s the point. You don’t need to worry about fancy hear, just go take photos!
Its the dumbest reply, both are altered to the level so that we cannot tell the difference. And your editing is not good.
Ahhh sorry you feel that way my dude! You can’t please everyone!
The point is that you can edit and add so much grain to any photo that it's difficult to discern the difference. If you provided the raw image for each scenario we would actually be able to tell you the difference. I could make a photo taken on a galaxy s24 ultra and take another photo on a iPhone 8 and edit them to look the same. Ultimately your video was a trash comparison at best.
@AnonymousGameWarden I’m so sorry you feel that way, I’m gonna change it all because this singular comment.
Seriously dude, I’m just having fun creating content, have a great day ❤️❤️
me in the corner with a 300 dollar camera and 80 dollar lens
Ain't nothing wrong with a $300 camera and an $80 dollar lens.
But a $300 camera with a $0 lens is even better ;)
Lucky you, that's a bulit of my monthly income
@@emperornephew6487you could buy one every month then
@@advntrswithmarley 0$ ? You mean pinhole on cardboard?
@@emperornephew6487Whattt😮
Next time you should show the pictures one right after the other.
Cheers for the feedback but it’s not too difficult to scrub through is it?
@@advntrswithmarleyI could slide back at forth but it’s be much easier at the end to just show both. This way people can see the differences easily and compare the photos better. Anyway, just my opinion and great video.
@WavyFBaby I appreciate the feedback heaps!!
@@advntrswithmarleytotally agree side by side photo was needed to compare
@AniketDEV it’s what I’ve been doing in my more recent content as this particular query is literally the most requested thing. Good constructive feedback is always appreciated
Date your camera body. Marry your glass.
Yes. I’ve divorced 5 cameras in 10 years.
Very well said 😊.
If they are compatible that is.
@@alexandruilea915 for sure! Though if you do eventually switch systems (say leave Canon for Sony) glass tends to hold value better than a body. At least in my experience. I’m sure there’s counter examples out there.
@@joshjacobson9846 I'm talking even between EF and RF for example.
Expensive camera matters if:
- Photography: Higher color bit depth (some go up to 16bit) means more flexible raw photos for editing
- Video: Camera IBIS, Video codec, Color Bit depths, High resolutions, Log videos
Lens matters if:
- You want sharper image quality
- Depends on the creative shots you will use.
Yes, gear matters but also, the way you use it matters.
1000000%!! What you’re using it for matters so much more
@advntrswithmarley Yeah...But I will still invest more on gears tho, because of todays smart phones can now get amazing outputs and wont know which is which shot on a camera.Lol
@@johnvincentespiritu4768In theory yes, in reality comparing low light photos from my wife's iPhone 13 Pro (which I thought were perfect before) with the pictures the Canon R8 + 35mm F1.8 (+editing of raw files) it's a night and day difference. Still, for average people I would recommend the smartphone as it's the cheaper option, easier to carry, doesn't overheat that easily, can be charged from any power bank while recording videos for example and doesn't require any editing skills. It has lots of advantages honestly. The camera does get better pictures and low light tripod videos but they require way more work.
@@alexandruilea915for regular people i will recommend ricoh and maybe they will soon release a 4th gen which i will be happy to buy as my secondary shooter. A ricoh blows away all phones and lets you get so much better at photography
fps shooting for sports too
It’s lens, lens that’s best. But it’s always the person behind the camera that matters more.
YES YES YES LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE BACK
Take off the Lightroom preset. C’mon.
That’s the whole point of the content. If you can’t tell them apart when used in a situation like this, then you can get great results no matter what
@@advntrswithmarleyso which are you showcasing? The lenses and the cameras?
Or your editing skills?
This cheap and expensive talk has screwed up the entire industry and all mindsets are pathetically living with ironies of consumerism. Get rid of this talk. Talk of taking a beautiful sensible picture first.
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. It's almost never about the gear, but the photographer behind the camera.
I get ur point, but also not complaining about the more expensive options. They have their use/ merit.
In good light, good weather, static subjects, any camera and lens combo are fair game.
Thanks for the video.
Well said my dude!
Definetly both pictures are great!!, second one looks more precise and clean. But the little bit of chromatic distortion on the first one makes the object look amazing, they complement very well. Nice youtube short👍👍👍
I appreciate the compliment my guy! I greatly appreciate it!
The only issue being that the 55-210mm is made for APS-C sensors.
I knew this but still got it for my A7IV 😅
They both look great to me. It kinda goes back to the argument about whether or not gear really matters. Me personally I feel like it’s all about the person’s perspective
Oh 100%. Give an experienced photographer a toy camera and they’ll make it work.
Thanks for editing them side by side for a true comparison
No stress my dude! Unless you're being sarcastic, then check the linked video!
Number 2 looks more clear and is the better one for me
Is it be because it looks clearer to you as to why you think it’s the better one?
@@advntrswithmarleywell yes and the curved wood on the second photo helps aswell
That’s cool to know my guy! Cheers for that insight
i would advise to show both pictures side-by-side at the end as well for an easier comparison but point proven! a good lens and a decent body will always be my go to!
Note that the 1st lens is for Aps-c zoom lens for sony. 2nd lens sigma 28-70mm F2.8 is for fullframe. 😅🤔
That is 100% correct
Location first, light second, lens third and then the camera. Those should be the priorities for a great photo.
I totally agree with you, but where does the photographer come into this. Pretty sure if I set my camera down in a cool location with fantastic lighting, the camera ain't gonna take the photo 😂😂
Premium price is for extremes (FPS, Dynamic Range, Lens Speed, resolution, fast focus) shooting anything with normal light, it’s the same
You nailed it.
The difference is largely felt in a scene where light is a luxury.
Putting them side by side would definitely help, and not letting us know which one is which until the end would be a good idea too. Also putting the settings on the bottom would help. With experiments like this it’s important to have consistent settings across the board to have a fair comparison. But out of these two images, the first one is better imo. So expensive camera w/ cheap lens wins this one :)
Putting them side by side is something I can't change in this one but have changed in newer pieces. It was the most requested and quite frankly, the only constructive feedback most people gave. As for the settings, thats not a bad idea either 🤔
Legends can't afford all Like me😂
😂 What would be your affordable range homie?
I think thet after 2015 the digital camera photo technology reached a level of quality so good that every full frame camera (even che cheaper consumer ones) can make great photos, and the more expensive ones are only needed for special condition uses, like: low light high iso, fast FPS, high resolution phots for crop, etc
I don't think you're wrong there by any means!
Expensive camera with expensive lens
Despite the editing, the second one has a clearly sharper look. Both look great though.
Cheers man! The editing is a bit over the top BUT the messaging is still the same. Glad you enjoyed the video!
Right! One more reason why I'm happy with my A7 mk1. Now just need good glass!
You and me both!
I still use the mk1 😂
@patrickbaghdisar2215 same here!!
i got a canon ef 55-200mm f4.5-f5.6 for 50 bucks. No scratches no haze no fungus. Works like a charm, i love the USM autofocus on it.
Yooo AMAZING! Especially if it's working for you for what you want to shoot. Thats the best kind of investment IMO
The trick is with nicer lenses you end up having less needs to correct lens artifacts in post, have an overall sharper image. But for tele zooms especially you usually have those artifacts magnifying when shooting sports, it's learning what you need vs what you can get away with.
Oh 10000%! Some people are fine with less sharpened images for the sake of a great shot as opposed to an okay-ish shot that’s tack sharp. Just because it’s in focus doesn’t mean it’s a banger.
Nicer lenses give you more flexibility BUT give a professional some cheap gear and they’ll think outside the box to achieve fantastic results!
Im not a photo guy but it appears to me that the first one has more noise behind the ring than the second one
You'd be correct, however, grain was added in post, which is most likely what you're seeing
Expensive camera for sports, expensive lens for portrait and landscape, easy 😊
Hmmm 🤔 some good food for thought
LOL. I can see you photographing indoor athletics with some f/8 telephoto lens (cheap).
And for landscapes which are mostly shot with lenses stopped down, even today's cheap kit lenses are very sharp and contrasty corner to corner.
It’d be good to put the telephoto through its paces in a sports scenario or even a live event scenario (somehow)
Honestly I'd recommend the exact opposite of this
@@petrpohnan875 lol also, I want to see you with a shitty focus doing sports photography.
Definately just the skills, doesn't matter the combination, u can evn take great shots with cheap camera & lense
10000% agree with you on this
Choose the expensive lens because you’ll keep them 10 years or more, instead of an expensive camera who’ll be upgrade every 2 or 3 years
For me the 2nd image the lettering is clearer and texture of the ring pops more (and on the other one I notice the soft glow aura /cloudiness more above the ring which isn't as nice) so I prefer the 2nd image if everything else is equal. But if we're talking about which lens I'd get given the price..is 10x difference .. I'd get a mid price prime lens instead 😊 smaller and better bang for buck as fewer moving parts than zoom. But I'd get a "slow" f4-f8 zoom lens for casual wildlife as I'm not a professional so the magnification/close distance is the main thing for me with a zoom
Give this man a damn medal. This is the most thought out comment I've recieved so far on this series. You sir, are absolutely correct.
I used to think cheap camera and expensive lens was the way to go, but expensive lenses are so heavy, that for me they take the whole joy out of photography
This comment is underrated. That's exactly what you need to know as a beginner!
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE ❤️❤️
That size isn’t worth it to me. I considered buying it but the size bro is insane 😢 once they make a newer model it’ll probably be worth it though
If you're refering to the 55-210mm telephoto, I'm still unsure what you're getting at... Can you explain a little further?
Generally, cheap lenses and expensive lenses will be able to take the same photo (providing they’re at the same focal length), but with huge variations in the sharpness, bokeh, distortion, colour etc. Yet the cheaper lens will still be able to capture the same frame as a more expensive one.
An expensive body on the other hand, can sometimes catch images the cheaper body can’t, due to features such as faster and more accurate focusing, and higher burst rates to name a couple. For most normal cases an expensive lens makes more difference (wedding/portrait, landscape). However for sports, wildlife, street (in some cases), the benefit of a better body will be more obvious.
1000% comes down to usage and what you’re actually doing. Taking that into account and buying what’s appropriate.
Perfect answer here
I believe it is too!
In 2004 I bought a Canon 20D and EF-S 10-22mm; EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L. Four years later I upgraded the body to a 50D, and 20 years later I’m still using the lenses on my R6mkII. Good glass is the better long term investment.
It's amazing how well those lenses have held up over the years! Investing in quality gear really pays off in the long run.
@@advntrswithmarley I started out in 1969 with a NikonosII underwater camera and in 1970-71 purchased a pair of Nikon F bodies and 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/1.8 Nikor lenses along with with LunaPro and Pentax 1° spot meter to do PJ work at college. You wouldn’t believe how easy was to get pretty girls who otherwise wouldn’t give you the time of day to pose “as background” for photos when asked. Then I would shoot some nice portraits and arrange to meet them the next day to give them their free prints as thanks. 😊
Photography can get you into some pretty cool situations, especially when you act confident and like you’re meant to be there.
It’s pretty awesome hear you’ve been at it for so long! What have you noticed over the years when it comes to the whole cheap vs expensive conversation? Are there things people get completely wrong when choosing gear?
@@advntrswithmarley As to equipment I think one should buy what they can afford and learn to work with it. I took some of my best photos in 2000-2004 with my first 2.1MP Kodak DC290 and 5.1 Minolta D7Hi digital cameras because it was so liberating not to be limited to 36 exposure roll of film and need to wait days to see the results. I learned by seeking out more experienced mentors to critique my work, which is the best way to learn - from your own baseline - and how to become more self-critical when viewing my results. That’s the point when a photographer will know, honestly, whether or not their gear is what is holding them back. Usually not.
In the 80s I got interested in video and bought a couple Sony Hi8 cameras and Betamax deck for edit but the results were marginal and cost of doing anything better prohibitive. But in 2012 when Apple put a 1080p camera and display on the iPad3 and there was a $5 editing app iMovie it was a game changer. Days after getting it I attended a family wedding and make a ‘behind the scenes’ video of the photo session before the ceremony, then the reception, editing as I shot in iMovie as I shot. I did the same thing the next day to document a whale watching trip we took. I’m very critical technically and was blown away by the IQ, auto focus, WB and audio compared to the results I was accustomed to with NSTC Hi8 video. I didn’t have RUclips channel but the father of the groom did and the response from family and friends was much better than the stills I also took and posted on my web site. Over the next ten years I shot fewer and fewer DSLR stills and more and more videos on iPad, iPhone and GoPro. It is only moving to the water, wanting to photograph birds and needing longer lenses which has got me back shooting stills again but I share them as music videos on RUclips (check my channel).
I think the most important photographic skill is storytelling. My first job in 1972-74 was with top wedding photographer Monte Zucker who created “storybook” 50-80 photo wedding stories that captured the wedding in stills like a Hallmark movie. I then worked at National Geographic in the photo labs from 1974-77 and knew the photo editors and once asked one what it took for a photographer to get their first assignment. His answer is something I remember every time I go out to shoot: “It’s not their photographic ability it is their ability to tell a story in a way than makes the reader feel they are standing there besides then seeing the action in person.” Here’s an example of what I mean from my tutorial site: photo.nova.org/CinematicApproach/ It wasn’t a planned thing, just some random guy I saw making a rubbing of a name I first photographed from a distance then walked up and interacted with who agreed to pose for the other shots.
number 2
What makes you say that?
You definitely need a good lenses. The edges are not sharp enough with the cheap lens. But dude could you pls put the two pictures side by side?
I agree that quality lenses do make a difference and it can be a staggering difference, but it’s not the whole picture. I seriously believe it comes down to who’s behind the camera, not so much the gear itself. Give a professional some cheap gear and they’ll think outside the box and produce insane results.
In my more recent content, that’s exactly what I’ve been doing. Posting images side by side to make the comparison easier. As for this particular piece of content, you can’t edit it once it’s up so this is just how it is!
The magic is in the glass, dude.
Why do you say that?
@@advntrswithmarley Lower end cameras, higher end cameras... all have pretty much the same output these days. It's the lens that makes the biggest difference.
@philipcooper8297 ooooooft hard agree
On cell phone screen it doesn’t matter if you’re using iPhone or mirror less camera.
You can goto your destination in a camry or bugatti but that doesn’t make camry the only thing you buy.
You’re 100% correct. It’s not the only factor in the solution for great photos. The biggest thing I’m trying to showcase here is that you don’t need expensive equipment to take great shots. Investing in your own creativity is what will benefit most. Especially for beginners.
But again, it’s only part of the solution. Not the whole things.
Definitely number 2
Can you explain further?
Of course that thing is called sigma 🗿
the brainr0t has consumed
I would like to see the original files from both and i would to see them compared in unfavourable light conditions (very low light/evening).
Yes, you may get them close enough, or “degrade” a bit the better one, but the more i can do in camera, the less time i have to spend on my pc. I’ve been using lightroom’s denoise ai for example, and while the end result is stunning, i have to delay the delivery because of the time it takes me to run the photos through lightroom’s ai denoise feature :/
Absolutely, I understand where you're coming from! It's great that you're focused on maximizing your efficiency in post-processing. While comparing original files in challenging light conditions could be insightful, my emphasis in this series is on honing your skills in-camera. It's all about finding a balance between equipment capabilities and your own creative techniques. You can achieve impressive results by mastering composition, lighting, and other fundamentals. Ultimately, I aim to empower beginner photographers to prioritize creativity and practice, rather than relying solely on equipment.
I think better using same focal length lens but different price to look different.
Lens is the key, 2nd one look better
Glad you think so my guy! Can you explain why you think it looks better?
It only depends on who's behind the camera
the first picture is a lot noisier, probably because you couldn't open the aperture as far.
Appreciate the observation! It's always interesting to see how different settings affect the outcome.
the proprietary lenses usually work best with whatever camera they are mounted on. Sigma makes an OK product for just about all SLRs but they aren't balanced to any one camera brand. many years ago, when i bought my canon AE1 i was taking a serious look at sigma and vivitar lenses. ended up going with original canon FD lenses which were insanely expensive but worked much better with the camera than the other brands.
Totally feel you on that! Sometimes you gotta drop some cash for the good stuff. Canon FD lenses are a classic choice!
Looking at both the more expensive lens with the cheaper camera looks a little sharper which is obvious that’s what the difference would be. Cheaper cameras still have a 24mp sensor which is definitely enough for great photos. Always go for better glass. Always.
Marry Lens, date body
You should show the unedited image ! I saw you comment that you tried to edit them as closely as possible but that just defies the whole point of the video. If the point is to show the difference, why edit them to look alike ?
The whole reason I started this series, is to prove to beginners you don't need expensive gear to take crackin shots. That's the point of the video and the series, which is why editing them doesn't matter. It may hurt some people to know that, but it's the truth. I know that when I was starting out, I thought gear was gonna make me a better photographer, but that's just not the truth. That comes from being creative and actually taking more photos.
“What’s the difference between this picture and this picture? “
Me: it’s the same picture
Haha, right? Just goes to show how tricky pictures can be!
The comparison would have to be: first versus fourth generation of a camera. At least I understand expensive vs. cheap to be a comparison of devices of the same age but different prices. Not a product that was comparable in price when it was new. A comparison of such different lenses is also not really meaningful. With an entry-level camera and a kit lens, under the right conditions, you can take great pictures where expensive devices would be of no advantage.
So are you saying gear doesn’t matter?
Different kind of DoF from each, although the compression from the cheap lens brings it close to what you got from the cheap camera shot. But sometimes you want a wider angle with more macro reach to use the blurred background to help tell the story. Both made a good image regardless.
It's the carpenter, not the tool, that makes a bigger difference in the quality of the product
both are great- but its more a lens comparison, to be honest when you said cheap camera i’m thinking sony nex or a5100. wasn’t expecting two a7’s
Where I am, you can pick up the A7 used for around $500 with lenses and sd cards but I see what you mean.
Gotta find an a5100
@@advntrswithmarley yeah cuz say i didn't have a sony and i was in the market for one cuz i want full frame performance, great iq, lens selection- the price gap between a mk1 and mk4 there's no question i'd just pick up a mk1 right away. mk4 is if i already had a mk3 and i want the latest greatest- different game :)
@@MakePictures Oh absolutely different game! Personally I think that's a point to Sony though, that the image quality of a 11 year old camera still keeps up today...
There was a huge jump between the A71 and A72 in terms of functionality and then a huge jump between the A72 ti the A73 in terms of autofocus and colour profiles, they're almost 2 different systems.
But seriously, you got me thinking about the A5100...
@@advntrswithmarley yeah you should absolutely get one- its great to have that level of portability where you can always keep it in your pocket, and the performance is solid- great iq. theres so many lens choices too, a number of different pancake lenses to stay portable, but you could also bring a telephoto in the bag just in case you need it. excellent video too, great dr. if you get a foldable screen hood for it, you can get a medium format shooting experience- pretty fun.
let me say this, Expensive camera + cheep lens, the camera can use the lens maximum potential. While cheep camera + expensive lens, the camera only can use the maximum ability that the camera can, it cannot use full potential of the x
expensive lens. (sorry my English still learning)
in my pov., there is no such as "cheap camera and cheap lens".
I kinda like this attitude, this outlook. I think it treats it all as the same. No matter what you got, you still have a camera.
sorry, my visual memory can't compare side by side the 1st image with the 2nd, but after watching again and again and again.... I can tell the better lens makes better image in this case
Date the body, marry the lens ✔️
Absolute words to live by.
Could we see an unedited side by side?
I’d love to but unfortunately it’s not something I can do after the upload
Always the lens over the camera
You marry a lens and date a body!
There are a 100 reasons 1 is better than the other, a simple photo doesn’t cut it. I use a $100 1979 canon FD 28mm 2.8 on my Sony as7iii for some projects and it looks amazing for that look I’m going for. But is it better than at Sony 24mm 1.4 GM? Well yes and no, it all depends on the criteria
Absolutely correct!
Remember kids! Lenses barely loses any value when cared for properly but camera bodies halve in price qhen the newer model comes out
You also pay for robustness, aperture, autofocus speed, moist or water resistance... price os not only about resolution or sharpness. Soecially if your foto equipment is for working. Then u also pay for reliability
You’d be surprised what affordable gear can get you in terms of final results, keen to know if you’re speaking from experience…?
I find these so counter productive- with a cheaper camera your camera will fail you in situations that aren’t Prestine, and with a slow lens, the exact same thing will happen with a nice camera. If you’re on a budget upgrade your glass first but if you want to work efficiently, get both
I totally agree with you. There are trade offs between both sides, however, I just wanted to clarify the aim of this series: it's all about showing beginner photographers that you don't need pricey gear to capture amazing shots. It's about finding those affordable alternatives that can perform just as well and fit within a budget. It's all about empowering others to realize their potential with what they have and finding creative solutions to the problems that might arise. Thanks for your understanding!
@@advntrswithmarley for sure. I was just scrolling through and was giving my 2 cents. No ill will! Definitely agree it’s the photographer that takes good photos, not the equipment.
@@MrSloufoot always the photographer. I’m a huge advocate for finding creative solutions to the problems you have and the results will aways surprise you! Cheers for the support homie! I greatly appreciate it ❤️🔥
I dont like the heavy edit in neither of both & for an easier comparison I'd put the photos side by side next time
Thank you for sharing your feedback!
In this images the expensive camera wins
But typically it is the lens that does better
But overall a combo of an expensive camera with up to date software and expensive lens Inshã Allãh of course the best
Outdated and cheap in price yes, cheap in quality no. Every piece of equipment he used is capable of superb images
You’re 1000% right! Cheap in price, not in quality!
It really really depends on what you are trying to do
You’re not wrong but you can get away with a lot using affordable gear if you’re willing to be a little creative
If your camera was made in the past 10 years the lens will make much more impact to the image quality. Build your lens collection not the camera body.
Absolutely! Investing in high-quality lenses can really make a difference in your photography, but it's not the whole picture, ya feel?
I’m using a $250 camera and an $80 lens. But it’s a 5D2, and a 28mm f2.8 Nikon AI lens 😂 high quality just old as hell now.
No one understamd that a high end body can make a cheap lens go superior some bodies ignore artifact and fringing so stop giving stupid things to peoples! I can shoot both all day no problems! Expensive lens will just give you good colours on yoir old camera!
I wish u would’ve put the photos side by side.
Check newer content my friend
I got a cannon 60d with the 18mm-55mm lens idk what its called but it still rlly great
Also a sony a6400 cam without a lens💀💀 cuz i got no budget left
any amateur photographer will be able to tell the difference easily. sometimes art is about the perfection and gear matters in that situation
I have to disagree here, art is never about perfection but embracing the emotion and feeling of the now. If art were about perfection, nothing would get done, because as an artist, striving for perfection gets us nowhere.
You wouldn't tell a painter to create the perfect art piece because, art is subjective. Their perfection is different to your perfection. Just as my style is different to your style.
Gear only matters once you've run out of creative problem solving and to a beginner, the creativity matter SO much more than being perfect.
@@advntrswithmarley see the whole point is, the art being perfect to the artist. i wholeheartedly agree, peoples perception of perfection is different. However, each artist is still striving to be perfect in their own realm or their own perspective. So I would say you actually made my point for me lol
creativity is what will separate you from others in your field, but sometimes in order to reach that level of creativity you need a decent set of gear.
For example, I film cars. my goal in terms of perfection is having extremely smooth footage for video. I have experimented with those cheap balancing gimbals from amazon and none are able to achieve the perfection I expect in my own work. for 98% of the people, they will not be able to tell the difference but I can tell it. and this is where perfection is part of the art process in my opinion.
Thanks for reading :)
Use Sony ZV-E10 with expensive lens.. Wanna see the results
I might be able to get my hands on that…
I have faced with A7riii with kit lens 28-70 and quality is very bad so i switched to tamron 28-75 the quality is excellent
They're both decent lenses. At that focal length and what is an ideal situation for the cheapo, the constant F2.8 of the Sigma isn't going to factor in. The verdict is, you can't have a verdict with this example. Spend money on good glass, most cameras are great nowadays.
You've made some excellent points about lens quality and performance! Investing in good glass really does make a difference in the long run, my question to you though, is does that actually matter when it comes to photography? If you can get similar results with a more affordable option, does that make expensive lenses null and void?
Yes and no . Just remember cameras or lenses just a tool knowing your tools is worth than having expensive gears . And yes it is all about glass glass glass . No light no image ;)
when editng images later it does not matter even with cheap lens and cheap camera.. 😊
I have the Sony a7rIV and I carry the 55-210mm (got it on eBay for $50) around when I'm out just bullshįtting taking random photos. It's not a terrible lens. I mostly carry it if I'm not in the mood to carry my big camera bag with my prime lens that all weigh a freaking ton.
More color depth more detail in sigma 😅. Lot more light in the sigma due to the fstop then again if they were both 2.8 or f4 there might be much more closer details, color and light
Expensive camera with expensive lens.
Oooh hot take! But can you explain your thought process further?
What do you think about a6000 marley? a6100/6400 will cost double of a6000. But can get a6300 at 1.5x price of a6000. Will use only for photography. Portrait/Street.
Ive got a friend who still has his A6000 and it’s a great camera to have in your bag! It performs well where it needs to without being cumbersome.
Definitely jump on it my dude
Next time show the tow images side-by-side for comparison
Coming from a guy that just switched to a new lens after 2 years of shooting on kit lenses, expensive lens cheap camera
It's amazing how a new lens can completely change your photography game!
It's not about the arrow, it's about the archer
That’s what she said
😂😉
I can't think, I lost my last brain cell watching this.
He who sacrifices his last brain cell in pursuit of knowledge may yet find wisdom in the ashes.
The second is, obviously much better.
Why is obviously much better?
@@advntrswithmarley because "glass" is much important than "sensor".
With all the tests I’ve done, it’s more the photographer and skill set than anything. Camera equipment is merely the tool. Not the influence
how about cheap camera with cheap lens?
Actually have a few of those, definitely check out more of this series on my channel
Can’t tell the difference! In most cases the SKILL of the shooter is going to determine the outcome of the photo or video! Invest in your SKILLS and decent gear and you can do just about anything in the video and photo world! 🤷🏾♂️ Great video!👍🏾
I totally agree! Skill definitely plays a huge role in creating amazing content.
You need a good expensive camera if you wanna take an outstanding photos ( stills and on moving subjects) I have been using Sony A7i since 4 years, the moment I upgraded to A7C I wondered everytime I started using it how the hell I managed to use the A7i for 4 years 🤣 it was a great tool to learn but not to level up and maybe get paid work with it, can be a pain in the ass with the focus and the speed of how it loads everything.
I landed my first few paid gigs with my A71 and I still use it with a very specific lens. But agreed. You learned all you could with that camera an got to its limits. The perfect time to upgrade!
What are those red pixels
On the camera? Focus peaking, so you can see where you're focusing correctly. Neat lil setting.
Pics should be side by side to compare
I've done that on more recent videos but it appears people still aren't happy with it 🤷♂️
A7 is still an expensive camera. Try something like a a5000 for cheap camera (I have a 5100 with a Tamron 18-300mm, that is cheap camera with expensive lens)
It’s in the works ❤️❤️🔥
How'd you get it to do the red lighting for the noise?
That’s called focus peaking. Should be a setting you can turn on in settings. Not every camera has it though.
It depends, if you're gonna shoot at lowest ISO to show details and sharpness then a good lens wins. From my experiments with lenses and bodies, you can get away with any telephoto or macro lens if you have a good body
That’s some serious food for thought. I’d love to put that to the test!
Ok, now compare them to a phone camera.
Check out some of the other content I’ve done on the subject my friend, done the iPhone already!
Should’ve shown raw photos
Thanks for the tip, I'll remember that next time!
My gear: 100$ camera with 60$ lens xD
That's best kind of gear! The one you can afford and use to death!