For years we read complaints on this forum about Nikon’s lack of an answer to Canon in the affordable, full frame, high megapixel category. Now that the D800 is waiting to make its debut, a great deal of angst is appearing on numerous forum postings. This angst is coming mostly from those who want and/or need an affordable, full frame, low noise in low light performer. The D700 previously fulfilled that need. The fear is that now that Nikon has announced the D800, they will not follow up with that second type of camera, which for lack of a better model number I will call the D3s/D4-lite.

For the most part, I identify more with the D3s/D4-lite for the type of photography I do. The question for me is whether the angst I’m reading has a solid foundation. We don’t Nikon’s final plan, but I think the answer to this question is “no.”

Nikon has released a very capable and promising camera in the D800, and with it, they have shrewedly gone after a section of the market they had not previously captured — or had only partially address with the rather pricey D3X. But does this mean they will discard the segment of the market they previously captured? That would seem foolish. Why would Nikon want to forego that much revenue? Isn’t it more likely that they will wait a while to sell D4 bodies, and then follow up with what low light shooters want or need?

In the end, going after the D800 with arguments about too many megapixels that no one needs or large file sizes no one should want to process, especially for a wedding, is a fruitless exercise because no matter what we say, the D800 is coming out. And if we’re making these arguments because we fear Nikon will leave us behind, we may find in another year or so that not only is the D800 a very useful camera, but that the D3s/D4-lite will also come out to serve us well.

Eduardo Suastegui is a fine art, portrait, event and wedding photographer serving the Downey and Los Angeles area.

When I photograph something, how much credit do I deserve? I ask this often, especially when I photograph someone else’s art. Sure, I can take some credit for proper exposure, and maybe the viewpoint I select, but really, that artist whose work I’m photographing did all the hard work. Here are 3 examples of what I mean.

This brings to mind the question of how much credit I deserve for photographing a beach…

…or a mountain…

…or a flower…

…or a person…

…or anything at which I point my camera since in the end I had very little to do in creating or making that object or person. Yes, I do have to exercise my vision and skill, and in some sense I’m re-interpreting whatever subject I photograph, but in the end, all I have left is photography imitating art.

Something to think about.

If like me you believe that photography stands apart thanks to your unique vision more than from technical excellence, now comes the hard part: how will your work stand apart?

The concept, if you haven’t heard it, claims that for too long photographers and photography have aimed to produce — and that’s the key verb — excellent work. The way to succeed and make a living has been to produce a product of highest quality. The emphasis has been to push for the most optimum techniques to make photos and the best display and print mediums to reproduce the photograph. In the end, the thinking went, an excellent product will get the sale.

The counter-point, especially in this age where just about anyone can produce fairly technically competent product, notes that it was never about the product. As important as technique and production were and continue to be, ultimately a photography enterprise succeeds thanks to the unique person behind the camera. That person’s vision and perspective must infuse the photograph with a unique character, and for most of photography business, the artistry and interpersonal skills of the photographer primarily drive getting the job in the first place and making the sale in the end. Only when your work reflects the unique, one-of-a-kind aspects you bring into your photography will you be able to differentiate yourself from the hoards of other photographers and thus command a decent living from your work.

Here’s the rub, however. If it is true that infusing your work with your vision is the only way to ensure its uniqueness, how do you get that unique vision no one else has? How do you know that you are unique enough to the point where if you infuse yourself into your photograph, no one else will be able to create anything like it?

Truth is, saying that you must infuse yourself into your work so that it stands alone, and actually having work that stands on its own because it reflects a unique you are not automatically connected. One must develop a lot as a photographer and artist to truly reach that point. This is a tough road that requires much introspection, and ultimately vulnerable revelation of who we are as photographers. Not many get there. And even when they do, the threat of the look-alike copy-cat is ever-present.

Someone wise once said “There’s nothing new under the sun.” That’s a tough one to beat.

After much anticipation, today Nikon announced the upcoming release of its new flagship camera, the Nikon D4 Are you aiming to buy it, or will you hang tight with the kit you currently have? For me the answer is simple: the D4 costs too much and weighs too much. It’s on both counts the wrong camera for me, even if its image quality promises to be a step above what any DSLR in its class or below can produce today. Hopefully Nikon will down the line, say a year from now, release a D700 form factor body carrying the D4 sensor and selling for a more “reasonable” (and still stratospheric for most) price.

For now, I’m sticking with what I have. In all of the gear-loving swirl, it’s good to pause and ponder what our current equipment can already accomplish — or more accurately, what we can accomplish with the equipment we already have. Looking back just a few (only 10 since I started?) years, I often smile thinking of all the new possibilities now available for my photography. At the moment, for the types of photography I do, I can’t think of a single way my equipment is limiting me or holding my photography back. Others may need more, but for me my current cameras already get me all the megapixels and low noise I need. The rest is just up to my imagination and ability to execute my vision.

Did you catch the Brian Williams interview of Annie Leibovitz a week or so ago? When the NBC anchor asked Leibovitz what camera she would recommend, she promptly reached into her purse, pulled out her iPhone and snapped a spiffy portrait of her interviewer. Along the way she outlined the advantages of the iPhone:

One should notice that with nice studio lighting, Annie and her iPhone only had to worry about nice composition. The shooting distance also fell in the iPhone’s sweet spot, and there was little need for the dreamy shallow DOF Annie might use in some of her portraits.

Still, I was not surprised by her pronouncement. It seems that lately many high end photographers are more than glad to proclaim the virtues of the iPhone. And so it was that when the teaser said Leibovitz would make a camera recommendation, I turned to my wife and said, “iPhone.”

In many ways, it’s not surprising the iPhone is garnering so much support among high end photographers. Aside from its artistically minded user interface and the practical fact that it is the camera that always goes with you, it also offers the advantages Leibovitz mentioned: “It’s a pencil, it’s a pen, it’s a notebook… the wallet with the family pictures… it’s accessible.” Thom Hogan also rightly points out how the iPhone is a camera fully integrated into the online infrastructure through which we share our photos today, an important paradigm shift.

This is all well and good, but noticing how the pluses tend to stray from considerations of what consititutes a well-rounded, complete photographic solution, it all still begs the question of whether the iPhone makes an acceptable camera. We should rightly ask how well a 12×18 print of Brian Williams’ portrait would look, how well Annie would have done in poorer lighting, and how many action sequences a pro photographer might be able to catch with an iPhone, say, during a super bowl game — just to mention a few situations where the snappy iPhone might fall short. The “it’s the photographer, not the camera” cliche only goes so far. When money’s down and getting the shot is mission critical, I doubt any sane pro would rely solely on his/her iPhone.

In fairness to Leibovitz, she did use the key, loaded phrase “snapshot camera” when referring to the iPhone. That amounts to a wink a nod that it’s good for the masses, but not so much for pro usage. That’s okay, because most of what everyday folk usually need is just that, a “snapshot camera,” and that’s perfectly acceptable for situations where high quality demands on the resultant photo are not in play.

Still, I am getting a little weary seeing pro photographers showing off with their iPhones. Case in point, Dewitt Jones waxing poetic about his iPhone exploits during one of his hikes.

While on the one hand I don’t fault them for liking and even advocating their iPhones, we would all benefit from a little more sober, less toyish exuberance when making across-the-board recommendations for the iPhone as an acceptable camera. Too much exuberance can lead to the expectation by the public that indeed all anyone ever needed was an iPhone, so why hire a wedding photographer (or pay her fees), or why buy a fine print when we can just snap away with an iPhone and get it for free? Yes, the iPhone promises to make photography accessible for and distributable by all. Take it too far, though, and it may devalue the very profession of those who with giddy enthusiam wave their iPhones with a bit too much glee.

That’s right: if writer’s can have a “block,” so can photographers. For me, it’s a dry time in my inspiration that can come either from being tired or from lack of compelling subject matter. Some of the ways I get past it are:

1. Take a trip. Get out of your usual environments. It’s good to return to a scene over and over again to see what else you can find in it, but you may also find eventually it turns into a dry tourniquet. A new city or location you haven’t previously explored may give you some new opportunities for your inspiration to catch fire and some new photos to emerge.
2. Take time off. Yup, it’s okay to not take pictures for a while and do something completely different. Life and photography aren’t synonyms. There’s more out there to do, and who knows if that something else will spark inspiration again?
3. Instead of taking photos, read a good book on photography, best in an area where you aren’t strongest. After you’ve read a while, go out and put some of what you’ve learned into practice.
4. Instead of taking photos, go through your old photos and re-process them. Maybe try a favorite color photo in B&W this time. Try out some new post-processing techniques. Analyze your photos for how you can improve them in the field. Next thing you know, you’ll be out there again looking for the next great shot.
5. Change equipment. Often this is thought to be a fool’s errand if it means investing in new equipment, but I’ve found that mixing it up (say going from long lenses to wide ones, or viceversa), or even (yes!!!) buying a new body renews my interest in photography and by virtue of wishing to put my investment to good use, I get out more, excited again by the hunt for new photos.
6. Change approach. If you usually go out in the golden hours, try shooting in midday in that horrible harsh light. Learn to shoot with flash to improve that “bad light” or make up for lack of any light (instead of insisting on high ISO). If you take photos really quick, force yourself to slow down and think more about it. If you are the methodical, set up the tripod, measure the light and take the photo 3 hours later, shoot fast and learn to recognize patterns and compositions quicker.
7. Change subject matter. If you’ve been shooting a lot of landscapes and all rocks and trees are beginning to look the same, maybe it’s time to shoot portraits, or rock concerts, or weddings, or (gasp!) birthday parties, or even go out and shoot some street photography.

For those suggestions that involve changing something, you may find out that even when you go back to the old and comfortable, you are better for it, you see more, capture better, and in all, end up with more keepers.

Anyway, that’s my approach, and you may want to try it and see.