# Any famous/talented/pro photographers that use minimum equipment?



## blackrose89 (May 17, 2012)

It's been said over and over that the equipment/camera doesn't matter (and this is NOT meant to be a debate about that lol) but I was wondering if there were any professional or famous photographers that actually live by this theory and apply it in their daily works? Any photographers known for using the bare minimum    such as a P&S or just something like an entry level w/ kit lens?


----------



## imagemaker46 (May 17, 2012)

I bought an entry level Canon T2i and used the kit lens to shoot a conference last week end, and several group photos. I did have my 1D mkll with me, but didn't use it.  Does that count?


----------



## Steve5D (May 17, 2012)

As far as I know, Neal Preston, who was Led Zeppelin's photographer for years, still uses film and does his work in an actual darkroom...


----------



## Mot (May 17, 2012)

Terry Richardson? He likes to use film point and shoots.


----------



## amolitor (May 18, 2012)

Edward Weston used pretty minimalist gear. He was reputed to contact print using a light bulb suspended over a table, and he did some pretty good work.


----------



## manny212 (May 18, 2012)

I shot with Ellen von Unwerth for a Guess campaign in Nov. she shot with  7D not gripped and a single lens all day !!! very minimalist . oh yea and the pictures are out in print everywhere now .


----------



## KenC (May 18, 2012)

I knew a very good amateur photographer, whose work, mostly SW US landscapes, I'd put against any pro's.  In 2004 he was still using a very old (don't remember model) Nikon film camera with the ordinary prime lenses he probably bought in the 70's.  He described going to a photo workshop out west where everyone thought he was an untalented amateur when they saw his equipment.  Then at a critique session where the participants showed their work, they were all very quiet when they saw his (Cibachrome prints he made himself), including the instructor.  When someone asked the instructor if he was going to say anything, he said there was really nothing he could criticize or suggest in relation to this guy's work.


----------



## Henrycrafter (May 18, 2012)

I have been in photography since 1954. I have 3 film cameras that I use and 1 digital.
I am a firm believer that someone who knows the equipment that they are using from A to Z will consistantly make better photos than the equipment jumper.
I have done well in photography.
My cameras are 
1. 1946 Speedgraphic 4x5 pacemaker press camera
2. 1972 Mamiya rb67
3. Sinar F monorail view camera
4. Canon 20d.
I made an adapter that allows me to attach the 20d to my Sinar so I can use the monorail functions digitally.
So as I said learn to use the equipment at hand to the maximum and you will allways get superior photos.
And most important "KEEP SHOOTING"


----------



## DiskoJoe (May 18, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> It's been said over and over that the equipment/camera doesn't matter (and this is NOT meant to be a debate about that lol) but I was wondering if there were any professional or famous photographers that actually live by this theory and apply it in their daily works? Any photographers known for using the bare minimum    such as a P&S or just something like an entry level w/ kit lens?



No one would work exclusively with what is considered a kit lens today. But there have been many famous photographers that have used little more then a leica rangefinder with a 35mm lens. I specify leica because if you are going to use bare minimum is should be the best.


----------



## DiskoJoe (May 18, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:


> I bought an entry level Canon T2i and used the kit lens to shoot a conference last week end, and several group photos. I did have my 1D mkll with me, but didn't use it.  Does that count?



Let check the list?

Famous: no
Talented: no
pro: no
handsome:no 

Looks like the answer HAS to be NO.


----------



## michaeljamesphoto (May 18, 2012)

One of my favorite artists, Duane Michals shot most of his work with an Argus C3, affectionately known as "the brick" 
Amazing work


----------



## michaeljamesphoto (May 18, 2012)

DiskoJoe, you come off as offensive, not funny. Your little  is just not cute.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (May 18, 2012)




----------



## Imajize (May 18, 2012)

In 2008 I was working with a wedding photographer that charged $5k-7k for a wedding, and she used a Canon 20D (which as the time was still pretty old)... but she went bananas on the lenses.  I think she had about 7k worth of premium L glass.

Me? I use a Canon 5D and CS4.  But I mostly shoot stuff for the web (not print), so 12 megapixels is still overkill


----------



## usayit (May 18, 2012)

Alex Majoli


----------



## Mot (May 18, 2012)

manny212 said:


> I shot with Ellen von Unwerth for a Guess campaign in Nov. she shot with  7D not gripped and a single lens all day !!! very minimalist . oh yea and the pictures are out in print everywhere now .



Wow! That must have been fun. She did a lifestyle shoot for River Island (clothing outlet) that I really liked, I even kept the catalogue! Having said that I don't like most of her work, it's a bit strange for me.


----------



## Derrel (May 18, 2012)

Henri Cartier-Bresson used a Leica rangefinder and a 50mm lens for well over 90 percent of his photos. For several decades.

Fritz Henle, long known as "Mr. Rollei", used the Rolleiflex twin-lens reflex cameras for the majority of his career.

Both guys got HUGE mileage out of their cameras with their respective normal focal length lenses. And not much else except vision, skill, and persistent dedication.


----------



## usayit (May 18, 2012)

Derrel said:


> Both guys got HUGE mileage out of their cameras with their respective normal focal length lenses. And not much else except vision, skill, and persistent dedication.



Garry Winogrand also... 

Leica M4 Garry Winogrand

Just imagine how many rolls went through that camera to leave an imprint like that on the back pressure plate and literally wear through the chrome plating with your bare hands.


----------



## Tkaczuk (May 18, 2012)

null


----------



## chuasam (May 19, 2012)

manny212 said:


> I shot with Ellen von Unwerth for a Guess campaign in Nov. she shot with  7D not gripped and a single lens all day !!! very minimalist . oh yea and the pictures are out in print everywhere now .


 I am going to die of envy right here right now! Ellen von Unwerth is my favourite fashion photographer ever. a 7D is a huge step up from her Contax T3


----------



## knownasthedon (May 19, 2012)

I think Anton Corbjin famous for his work with bands such as U2 only ever uses one leica me series camera & one lens


----------



## imagemaker46 (May 19, 2012)

DiskoJoe said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > I bought an entry level Canon T2i and used the kit lens to shoot a conference last week end, and several group photos. I did have my 1D mkll with me, but didn't use it.  Does that count?
> ...



Did you even take the time to find out anything about me, or did you just assume?


----------



## Derrel (May 19, 2012)

usayit said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Both guys got HUGE mileage out of their cameras with their respective normal focal length lenses. And not much else except vision, skill, and persistent dedication.
> ...



How many undeveloped rolls of film did Winogrand leave behind when he died??? Wasn't it something just north of 2,500 rolls??? Here is a link to that one famous shot of Winogrand's old Leica, which sold at auction for a zillion dollars... 005jzo-13237084.jpg


----------



## imagemaker46 (May 19, 2012)

Leica has always stood the test of time, they had the best glass, and some still believe that they do, it really is no wonder that some of greats that worked in the business used them.


----------



## usayit (May 19, 2012)

Derrel said:


> How many undeveloped rolls of film did Winogrand leave behind when he died??? Wasn't it something just north of 2,500 rolls???



I believe so....  I wonder if any of them have been developed.



> Here is a link to that one famous shot of Winogrand's old Leica, which sold at auction for a zillion dollars... 005jzo-13237084.jpg



I think the one pictured is different photog's camera.... Jim Marshall's

Garry Winograd almost exclusive to the 50mm focal length

Jim Marshall almost exclusive to the 35mm focal length

Personal choice and style contributed to that.....  I wish I could be that dedicated to stick and really learn a single focal length.


----------



## Derrel (May 19, 2012)

AH...yes...my mistake on the early Leica...here is a web page devoted entirely to GARY WINOGRAND's last Leica M4....several pictures, including the famous pressure plate shot!!

http://www.cameraquest.com/LeicaM4G.htm


----------



## gsgary (May 19, 2012)

Joel Meyerowicz


----------



## cgipson1 (May 19, 2012)

Correction on the Link Derrel posted above....  Leica M4 Garry Winogrand


----------



## Sw1tchFX (May 20, 2012)

Andreas Gursky. The record holder of the most expensive photograph ever.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (May 20, 2012)

blackrose89 said:


> It's been said over and over that the equipment/camera doesn't matter (and this is NOT meant to be a debate about that lol) but I was wondering if there were any professional or famous photographers that actually live by this theory and apply it in their daily works? Any photographers known for using the bare minimum    such as a P&S or just something like an entry level w/ kit lens?




Hell, yeah.

I'm famous and I shoot with a Brownie.


----------



## IByte (May 20, 2012)

Buy me a case of Sam Adams, a dozen wings.  Wait about eight beers through, and i will frigging astound you Oo!!


----------



## Solarflare (May 24, 2012)

Steve5D said:


> As far as I know, Neal Preston, who was Led  Zeppelin's photographer for years, still uses film and does his work in  an actual darkroom...


 The question of the thread was MINIMUM equipment ? Chemical isnt minimum ... it still has substantial advantages over digital, after all.


----------



## photolodico (Jun 7, 2012)

Annie Leibovitz talks a lot about how she started out just with a Leica for most of her early Rollingstone work and how in the past ten years she's tried to return to that for her personal projects.


----------



## gsgary (Jun 7, 2012)

photolodico said:
			
		

> Annie Leibovitz talks a lot about how she started out just with a Leica for most of her early Rollingstone work and how in the past ten years she's tried to return to that for her personal projects.



Her early stuff in Rollingstone was shot with a Minolta SR-T 101


----------



## JoshuaSimPhotography (Jun 7, 2012)

DigitalRev recently did a series of videos called Pro Tog Cheap Cam, where they got famous photographers and gave them lame cameras (lego, iPhone, etc.). And to be honest, they failed! they had no idea what to do, they had to use expensive flashes and equipment! So in the modern day, equipment is everything for a photographer. BUt someone like Ansel Adams, had very minimal equipment and only a month worth of photographical knowledge. So it goes to show, equipment doesn't matter...


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 7, 2012)

JoshuaSimPhotography said:


> DigitalRev recently did a series of videos called Pro Tog Cheap Cam, where they got famous photographers and gave them lame cameras (lego, iPhone, etc.). And to be honest, they failed! they had no idea what to do, they had to use expensive flashes and equipment! So in the modern day, equipment is everything for a photographer. BUt someone like Ansel Adams, had very minimal equipment and only a month worth of photographical knowledge. So it goes to show, equipment doesn't matter...



I'd like to know what "famous" photographers failed.  Being famous doesn't always make a person skillful.


----------



## yerlem (Jun 7, 2012)

I think it is all about what kind of resources you have when you first start shooting. If you can have everything you want when you first start, then you are never going to have to think how you could have accomplished something without proper equipment. Obviously equipment limits you, but it's also important to be resourceful.


----------



## fjrabon (Jun 7, 2012)

JoshuaSimPhotography said:


> DigitalRev recently did a series of videos called Pro Tog Cheap Cam, where they got famous photographers and gave them lame cameras (lego, iPhone, etc.). And to be honest, they failed! they had no idea what to do, they had to use expensive flashes and equipment! So in the modern day, equipment is everything for a photographer. BUt someone like Ansel Adams, had very minimal equipment and only a month worth of photographical knowledge. So it goes to show, equipment doesn't matter...



I think this probably had more to do with not knowing the equipment than the quality of the equipment.  They mostly seemed to just not know how to get the best out of what they were given because of unfamiliarity.  The thing with lower quality equipment is that you can get great shots out of it, but you really have to know its strengths and weaknesses backwards and forwards.  Its doubtful that these photographers were willing to put that kind of time and effort out of their busy lives for an 'experiment'.

For instance if someone has been shooting a D5000 with mediocre lenses for years, and then they move up to a D700 with top of the line glass, at first their work will actually tend to take a step back as they get used to what does and doesn't work with the camera, frame size and new lenses.  This is one reason why a lot of times when people move 'up' in equipment, they jump to saying "man, equipment doesn't matter, my old pictures were just as good or better!"  Then over months and months, if they stick to the new equipment and they better gain an intuitive feel of its strengths and weaknesses, and how to coax what you want out of it, the better equipment allows their new work to eclipse what they were doing previously.  

It's 90% the talent of the photographer, 5% knowledge of the equipment and 5% the quality of the equipment.  or something like that.


----------



## caseysrt (Jun 8, 2012)

I took all of these with a Nikon D3100, a $60 tripod, and a Nikon 18-55 kit lens. Only add on was a circular polarizer.

Planning on taking some more this weekend.


View attachment 10839View attachment 10843


----------



## fjrabon (Jun 8, 2012)

Another thing I think that needs to be differentiated between is minimalist gear v. 'low quality' gear.  For instance, Leica's, while very minimalist, were always amongst the highest quality you could buy, especially for anything remotely photojournalistic.  From the OP it's somewhat unclear which she's talking about.  I dont think there are a whole lot of famous photographers who are using/used very low quality gear, unless that's part of a gimmick or something.  That's not so much to say that they couldn't, as much as they don't have any reason to.


----------

