Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nikon D3000 and real estate photography

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nikon D3000 and real estate photography

    Hi everyone!

    I've recently started working as a real-estate photographer in New South Wales, and have had to buy a heap of gear. I've bought a new lens, tripod, camera bag, flash... lots of lovely toys Not once did I question whether or not I'd need to get a new camera body!

    Recently, however, I posted to the franchise's forum asking what the other photographers thought I should get in terms of my lens and flash, and mentioned that I'd be working off a D3000. Long ago someone told me that money is best spent on lenses, and I thought that if I got a decent enough lens, my D3000 would be ok. I know it's not a pro camera, but it has served me well and frankly, I cant afford a new one at this point. One of the photographers wrote back to me saying "A D3000, eeeeeeeek! you'll need a better camera for this."

    This made me a bit nervous, as after all my other recent purchases a new camera really isn't an option. I have also learned to take camera advice with a pinch of salt, in my experience there is a great deal of camera snobbery in the world of photography. While I appreciate that some of the pro cameras are amazing and would love to upgrade one day, I still think my D3000 should be fine. Everything will be HDRed, which allows for a bit of error I think.

    What do you guys think? Am I being naive? I would love some advice on this, as I was so excited to get going and now I'm a little nervous that my equipment wont be up to scratch.

    Thanks everyone,
    Jacqui

    * I've attached a couple of examples of what I'll be doing, pics I took for my portfolio
    Flickr Blog 500px Portfolio

  • #2
    Hi Jacqui,

    I'm not a professional photographer, but I would say your initial assumptions are right: you'll be fine for now with the D3000 and a great lens. Personally, I always cringe when I see the word HDR, because I expect to see an overdone, "artsy", over-saturated photo. Yours, on the other hand, I think are exceptionally well done.
    Nikon D80 / 18-55mm VR f/3.5-5.6 / 55-200mm f/4-5.6 / 50mm f/1.8 / SB-400
    Flickr Photostream / Photosynth Panoramas / 500px Portfolio

    Comment


    • #3
      I could not tell that they have been retouched which is a good thing.
      D7100 D90 SB-910,SB-900
      DX AF-S 35 mm 1:1.8 G DX 50 mm 1:1:4
      DX AF-S 18-105 mm1:3.5-5.6 G ED
      AF-S 70-300 mm 1:4.5-5.6 G
      AF-S Micro 105 1:2.8 G ED

      Comment


      • #4
        The quality of picture is depend on you
        This
        The few advantages of a pro camera in that setting (indoors, controlled light, low iso, tripod) would be in camera bracketing, external flash control, and more resolution. High iso performance is moot, better af likewise, given the subject manual focus would work.
        If the pictures are just to be viewed online; or printed in flyers, brochures etc resolution shouldn't be a problem either.
        My Flickr, Shutterfly, My 500px

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi Jacqui,

          Those images are great - focus is spot on, DOF is great, everything is pin sharp, exposure, colour and saturation are good. There's a whole lot of snobbery around the internet about the camera body you own, what's a pro camera and all that. A pro camera is one that gets you the images you want and earns you a living. This often has much more to do with the photographer than the camera. There are lots of 'gear-heads' around with fancy so-called 'pro' equipment who can't shoot a decent photo. If your D3000 is giving you the images you want, and it's not holding you back, then there's no need to upgrade. The time to upgrade is when your current body isn't giving you what you really need, and a better one offers what it's lacking.

          Ignore ccting's comments above - he doesn't know what he's talking about - all Nikon DX sensors are 24mm x 16mm, and all of them can do big prints! I used to have a D700 (12MP) and have printed 36" x 24" prints. My current D7000 (16.2 MP) can print even bigger. The D3000's ISO performance isn't holding you back either - neither of those photos shows any indication of high ISO noise.

          Have faith in your current gear - it's doing the job you need and your work is great. Keep it up!

          Best Regards,

          Graeme

          PS You have some great images in your 500px gallery too!
          Last edited by gfinlayson; 11-24-2011, 11:38 PM. Reason: Spelling
          Nikon D7000, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, Samyang 35mm f/1.4, Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S, Nikon 85mm f/1.8 AF-D, Tamron 180mm f/3.5 Macro, Sigma 500mm f/4.5, SB-800 x 3.

          Comment


          • #6
            ccting:

            Are you batcrap crazy, or just plain old delusional?
            I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
            adammontpetit.com
            Gear List
            500PX | Graphic Design

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ccting
              I am a bit crazy. But, just look at his clients' comments. Think out of the box of photographers. Many clients who know nothing about photographers are actually looking at your gears for hiring you, not how good you can take with your existing gear..
              First of all, learn to read. He said that another photographer said that a D3000 wouldnt cut it. That's an opinion from someone who ISNT a client. What the OP has shown, though, is that s/he has incredible skill.

              Second: if "your clients" are judging you on the list of gear you present them and not on a portfolio, that's not a client I'd want. That's just stupid, and, from experience, not the case. Again, you're talking out your ass.

              Have you ever dealt with actual paying clients? have you ever sat down with a client to go over a project? Have you ever had to present a portfolio to a client? What about a list of equipment?

              Im gonna guess the answer to that is no. An emphatic no.

              Your giant post doesn't actually SAY anything. It's just a lot of words. If you want to make a point, make it.
              I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
              adammontpetit.com
              Gear List
              500PX | Graphic Design

              Comment


              • #8
                @ccting-You have no idea what you're talking about!
                You continually spout off misquoted and completely fabricated information like it's the gospel truth. You've owned a camera for a few months and all of the sudden you know how to run a photography business? You've said repeatedly that you're a total newbie and that you have a D5100, yet you're telling the OP that a client requires professional equipment? So when exactly did you start running a successful photography business? Exactly.
                I know you're loving all the ebooks you're reading, and idolizing Ken Rockwell's site, and that's great. Hang onto the enthusiasm. And by all means, ask questions and post photos for critique. But stop giving out misinformation like you're some kind of photography genius. All you're doing is making yourself sound completely ignorant, and driving the rest of us crazy.

                And just an FYI, I believe you were trying to quote Porter's Five Forces Model, which never says identify your enemy. It's about strengthening the core competencies of your own business to remain competitive. And it's completely irrelevant to the OP.
                Nikon D7100, Nikon D7000, 50mm f/1.4, 28-75mm f/2.8, 90mm f/2.8 macro, 80-200mm f/2.8, 85mm f/1.8 (2) SB600
                My Website
                My 500px
                Facebook

                Comment


                • #9
                  Short circuit in my brain... send for repair... for 1 month...
                  Sry, i gain two permanent head damages before...
                  Last edited by ccting; 11-25-2011, 03:45 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks for the advice everyone!
                    I didn't check the forum for a while so I missed all the drama and didn't see ccting's original reply so I'm a bit lost in that respect... lol
                    Anyways, I'm sure it doesn't matter, I'm thrilled most of you think my d3000 should be good enough. That said, I recently had a look at some D7000 reviews and am a bit like a school girl giggling over a Justin Beiber poster... except it's a camera. And it doesn't have silly hair...
                    I guess my Christmas wish list just got a bit longer!
                    Luckily the d3000 will do for now
                    See ya and thanks again for the advice!
                    J
                    Flickr Blog 500px Portfolio

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The only question I have is - are you finding that sometimes, you're falling short on the wide angle due to your camera body being a crop sensor?

                      I had a good chat with a real estate photographer once here in Sydney and watched him work. He does say that having a full frame camera does help a lot due to the advantage of maximizing the wide angle length of his lenses. A lot of times, you do need to get as much in as you can within the frame as you don't have a lot of space to work with.

                      Anyhoo, that's my only question. Don't worry about your gear as you are doing fabulously with what you have. I think it's just christmas and you are getting 'new gear itch'
                      My FLICKR

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by graciousness View Post
                        The only question I have is - are you finding that sometimes, you're falling short on the wide angle due to your camera body being a crop sensor?
                        Why? Sigma makes the widest-angle lenses on both DX and FX: 8-16 and 12-24, and they're essentially equivalent. Even if you wanna stay in the Nikon realm, The 14-24 and 10-24 are almost as wide (114 deg VS 109 deg). Furthermore, to get "equivalent" kits, you'd be dropping $2500 for a body and $2000 for the lens; by sticking with DX it's just the case of a $900 lens.

                        That's huge.
                        I am responsible for what I say; not what you understand.
                        adammontpetit.com
                        Gear List
                        500PX | Graphic Design

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Everything will be HDRed, which allows for a bit of error I think.
                          Jacqui, your photo examples are great, and your portfolio will be well served by examples like this. My wife and I do a fair amount of real estate photography, and being that most images wind up on the real estate's website, or brochures, HDR processing (although very nice) might be overkill for their purposes. I think you will learn that proper use of your domed and bounced speedlight will give you pretty consistent results without the need of extra work HDR processing. Shooting RAW will also help with some of those minor exposure/WB issues. And yes, your camera is absolutely fine for what you are doing...nice job, keep up the good work
                          Vince "...the law of unintended consequences, sometimes, you get a truly memorable photograph"
                          Gear: Canon G2, Canon 20D, Nikon D300...bunch of lenses
                          My Flickr
                          www.montalbanophotography.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by OsmosisStudios View Post
                            Why? Sigma makes the widest-angle lenses on both DX and FX: 8-16 and 12-24, and they're essentially equivalent. Even if you wanna stay in the Nikon realm, The 14-24 and 10-24 are almost as wide (114 deg VS 109 deg). Furthermore, to get "equivalent" kits, you'd be dropping $2500 for a body and $2000 for the lens; by sticking with DX it's just the case of a $900 lens.

                            That's huge.
                            This is why I'm asking. Because it's really a genuine question I am asking as I really don't know if there is a huge difference Not having a full frame camera myself, I don't know if wide angle makes a big difference.

                            I asked the OP, too, because I don't know if sometimes he runs out of space and feels he needs a wider option with the gear. Not that I'm into real estate, but I feel that way a lot of times when shooting.

                            Also, if the OP is thinking of upgrading camera body at some point, wouldn't you consider a full frame for this type of job, too, instead of going for another crop one? Or does it really not make that much difference?
                            Last edited by graciousness; 11-28-2011, 08:55 PM.
                            My FLICKR

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Grace, this little nursery shot by my wife is probably not much wider than 7'..a tight little room to say the least, but you can see how an 11mm tokina shot on a crop body can open it up. No real need for a full frame


                              N_0007 by vmontalbano, on Flickr
                              Vince "...the law of unintended consequences, sometimes, you get a truly memorable photograph"
                              Gear: Canon G2, Canon 20D, Nikon D300...bunch of lenses
                              My Flickr
                              www.montalbanophotography.com

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X