M8 considered a professional camera?

Canon defined what professional equipment is. They offer the "Canon professional service" CPS. You can become a member if you are a pro and own at least two pro bodies (1D or 5D) and 3 L-Lenses.
 
Canon Reflex Advanced Professional Service:

C.R.A.P.S.

Takes care of both subject matter in one acronym. ;)

~Joe
 
kalina said:
You can take some amazing pictures with almost any camera, even the "toy cameras" like the Holga. The "professional" is not in the camera, but in the person.
Click to expand...

i disagree to certain degree. i decided to pass on the M8 as a professional workhorse as it didn't fit my "professional" needs. Service was an unpleasant experience to say the least and the camera was no where near as capable as much more affordable and tougher systems (in my opinion). included were a host of other reasons. it was a tough decision as i had been working on rf's for a while and really wanted the m8 to be a permanent fixture in my kit.

therefore for me the "professional" was most certainly missing from the camera.
 
emraphoto said:
i disagree to certain degree. i decided to pass on the M8 as a professional workhorse as it didn't fit my "professional" needs. Service was an unpleasant experience to say the least and the camera was no where near as capable as much more affordable and tougher systems (in my opinion). included were a host of other reasons. it was a tough decision as i had been working on rf's for a while and really wanted the m8 to be a permanent fixture in my kit.

therefore for me the "professional" was most certainly missing from the camera.
Click to expand...


Equally, for me, DSLRs aren't suitable for me as 'professional' cameras because they're too big and heavy for a camera delivering (at best) the same quality as a 'baby' Linhof -- and, of course, they have no movements. I want either a small light camera (Leica) or a versatile one.

Fifty years ago, the idea of 'professional' 35mm was commonly pooh-poohed, too, and in the Bad Old Days of Purchase Tax in the UK, only cameras bigger than quarter-plate (3-1/4 x 4-1/4 inch) were regarded as 'professional' and taxed accordingly.

It all depends on what you do for a living; how you want to earn it; and how far you want to impose your definitions on other people. Let's be honest: 'professional' is as completely meaningless when applied to cameras as when applied to loo paper (see above). It's just that some idiot in the marketing department thought it sounded good.

Tashi delek,

R.
 
I think when you've got your shooting technique down, whats at hand is the task that is required of you.

I might be comfy with a d3x normally, but maybe i would switch out for an M8 if i were to cover a project for Nat Geo about the shady Yakuza life in Japan.
Or if i needed it even smaller, maybe a Sigma DP2?
 
It's not the pen, it's the penmanship :) But then, there are times you can't use a BIC ballpoint where a Mont Blanc fountain pen is "needed."
 
Roger Hicks said:
Equally, for me, DSLRs aren't suitable for me as 'professional' cameras because they're too big and heavy for a camera delivering (at best) the same quality as a 'baby' Linhof -- and, of course, they have no movements. I want either a small light camera (Leica) or a versatile one.

Fifty years ago, the idea of 'professional' 35mm was commonly pooh-poohed, too, and in the Bad Old Days of Purchase Tax in the UK, only cameras bigger than quarter-plate (3-1/4 x 4-1/4 inch) were regarded as 'professional' and taxed accordingly.

It all depends on what you do for a living; how you want to earn it; and how far you want to impose your definitions on other people. Let's be honest: 'professional' is as completely meaningless when applied to cameras as when applied to loo paper (see above). It's just that some idiot in the marketing department thought it sounded good.

Tashi delek,

R.
Click to expand...

i am not so sure i agree roger. in actuality the term "professional", when applied to say a d3, will result in tangible differences than say a d300. my intention is not to split hairs but sometimes those added "professional" features can make a very big difference in the field. i do understand that a lot of this is subjective when one considers what exactly it is you do for a living

to merely chalk up the differences between a 1ds mkIII and a 50d to "marketing voodoo" is ignoring some serious differences in build, capability and features.

when i considered the m8, at length and very carefully, as a sound professional investment it didn't stand up against some of the other options for a multitude of reasons. as a do it all, rugged and well supported photojournalist camera it failed my criterium test. thus my point i suppose.

can you produce great images on any camera? yeah, you sure can. the camera won't instantly turn you into a professional by no stretch of the imagination but to label the differences between a d3 and a d300 as marketing mumbo jumbo doesn't make a lot of sense to me. i do agree that a lot of this is subjective when what exactly you do with your cameras is considered.

i would never "impose" my thoughts on any one and yes a great photographer can produce regardless of the gear but there is a reason you see the cameras you do in the pools and out in the field. it isn't because all those folks are marketing suckers.
 
emraphoto said:
...there is a reason you see the cameras you do in the pools and out in the field. it isn't because all those folks are marketing suckers.
Click to expand...

Nor is it necessarily because they are using the cameras they want. Many newspapers have deals, and staff photographers (I know -- an ever rarer breed) have to buy their own kit if they don't want to use what the newspaper provides.

We also run into the point that a camera that is very good at many things, and adequate for most, is not always the best camera for a particular job.

One of my friends who is a very successful UK press photographer recently told me, on getting his 24th award (including second and third places as well as first), that 16 of them were taken with Leicas.

Oh: and there are many kinds of professional photography as well as the press. Industrial? Advertising? Catalogues? Portraiture? Feature? Nature? Travel? Stock? Glamour? I know more people in these fields than in news.

Tashi delek,

R.
 
Last edited:
first let's get this out of the way - can majoli produce stunning work on a holga? i would bet on it. is a d3 a different beast than a d90/d300? yup, most certainly is. will either one make you produce better images? probably not.

agreed, there are indeed many different fields in professional photography and the "staff shooter" is quickly becoming a very rare sighting.

i am not sure however what the point of an awards list is in the context of what i am saying. i am the first to say that gifted photographers will produce great work on whatever you give them. i have recently shot work that has managed to pay this months mortgage (whew) on a point and shoot. all of that is a different topic altogether. (please don't mistake that for shameless self promotion)

what i am saying is that the "professional lines" of some of the big guns are built with more than marketing hype. that's it that's all. they have build quality and features that place them in that category of camera.

let us return to a point you commented on, that i brought up. yes, i am very well aware that the folks i meet out "on the job" are shooting on cameras from the pool. in other words cameras the employer owns. now assuming most media outlets are intended to be fiscally responsible one must ask "why on earth would they purchase a $5500 1d mkIII (or more often than not a mkIIN) when you could pick up a 40d/50d/rebel?" obviously more examples could be provided but i am sure you get the point. as this is essentially the normal practice in the pools, 1d's and that lot, it would be easy to recognize a trend.

removing the abilities of the photographer, award lists and all, from the equation there are certainly fundamental differences between the professional lines at nikon, canon and the models intended for the consumer/hobbyist audience. these differences are certainly more concrete than marketing hype.

that's where i disagree. the attributes of nikon professional cameras have proven to be very meaningful to me. so much so that i am willing to pay more than twice the price versus the lesser hyped models. i am however comfortable with "prosumer" toilet paper.
 
I recall when I started shooting weddings, you really needed a big camera, and perhaps a bigger flash to be considered any good. MF was Miniature, and if you shot 35mm you were obviously not being paid to shoot.

Things change.

While I would not feel unarmed shooting with an M8 at a wedding, or other events, with my gimpy leg and increasing lack of patience and tact, it would be better for all if I am using a DSLR, obviously AF and AE, good size flash, and a spare set of equipment.

I have to feel I can get all the shots I expect to be recorded properly at a wedding, and the zoom takes the place of my legs.


I could get by with film and an SLR, but my first stop would be to a shop that processes and gives hi res scans.

It would take a lot of money for me to hand print today, for someone else, and perhaps a bottle of Henri Bardouin.

Regards, John
 
Cameras are tools. The M8 is a tool made to excel at a certain type of photography. However, as a camera system, DSLRs are more flexible tools to do a variety of jobs (flash, zoom, wide angle, low light, etc...).

The M8 is certainly capable of producing professional results, but is it the best tool for a wedding photographer to tell the story of an event? There are easier tools to use, but it's the photographer/client that has to answer that question.
 
Come on. Can we get past such questions? It's the person not the camera that would be professional.

To pick nits: there are really only 3 professions: clergy, law and medicine. Any other use of the word professional boils down to marketing. Either by companies or people trying to market themselves as something they are not. Probably throw a throw-back to the days of yore when "the professions" were still held in high esteem.

Cheers, JP
 
you're asking to get past such questions then "informing" us of "how it is"?

as mentioned numerous times were are not discussing photographers. we are discussing whether or not a camera deserves the moniker "professional" or if there is any fundamental value/truth to the branding. i believe there is. it's an interesting question and i believe it could prove to be helpful to the original poster or we wouldn't be discussing it. as roger astutely offered there are many, many different genres of professional and that will always be relative. for a photojournalist working in demanding weather conditions or producing work for wire service the M8 wouldn't be my first choice. the operative word being MY choice. for someone shooting say corporate events where discretion and stealth are important, the demands of weather, batteries etc. aren't a huge issue then the M8 would be a very strong contender.

despite all the warm and fuzzy "the camera doesn't make the photographer" comments (and they are more often than not 100% true) investing in the most effective gear as a working photographer is a very important decision that can effect the bottom line in many different ways.
 
Actually, I'm only informing you that the question is vague and that the word "professional" has become a marketing gimmick.
 
certainly the question is vague. there is an intrinsic value to the discussion though whereas folks considering a move to professional work, their next purchase as a working photographer or say a student researching etc. etc. can stumble upon it whilst googling about and hear/read some opinions from folks who have experience in a working environment or have loads of experience.

yes it is a vague question however through dialogue it doesn't need to remain that way. i worked on a pair of m8's for a year and a half and i am offering up my thoughts in hopes that it benefits someone seeking answers. my thoughts are admittedly not the gospel.

through dialogue we can turn a vague question into a learning tool for folks. i believe there is merit in the conversation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom