Do You Think Entry Level DSLR Cameras Help or Hurt Professional Photography?

[electrosmack1]

With better and better entry level DSLR cameras coming out on the market, do you think this is good or bad for professionals? Such as for wedding photographers, child sports, family portraits, and among others.

[brian_rmsy]

The camera can do only so much the rest is up to the Photographer.

[spartan 117]

More of help than hurt

[Terisu]

I think it helps. Pros have to start somewhere. After all, they don't start out as pros, and they have to learn on something.

[Pooky]

I think it will help--after a while. A newbie who does not care to learn about photography is not really going to be able to produce good photos with any camera, expensive or not.

A friend's colleague bought Canon DSLR last year (30D, I think)--and the 24-105 mm IS L zoom (total was more than two grands). And just a week later, she was in charge of taking photos of a retirement party of her boss. No one else brought the camera--and it was a disaster. This person never used a camera before.

[Michael U]

It's good for the next generation and competition is never a bad thing for the previous generation!

The difference will always be the photographer - good photographers can produce better results, more consistently and more creatively: more likely to stop you in your tracks than photographers who are not so good.

Exactly the same argument occurred when 35mm technology hit the market and when the SLR camera was launched... low end competition will always impact the market though - but it effects the lower end photographers first, especially if they can't differentiate their work from the bulk of amateurs.

[V2K1]

I don't think it's hurt the pro's.

Professional cameras have always been available to the public.

It's experience, instinct and having "the eye" that makes a professional -- not what's in his or her camera bag.

V

[Photo Girl]

I think it's hurting us... there are way too many people who think they can do our jobs.