I consider myself a semi professional.
Odd thing to say from someone who earns their entire income from one source pool, but the reality is, I have never taken the one big step that would make me, to the common wisdom, fully professional.
That big step?
Spend a lot of money on perceived “top end” gear.
I like to think my gear is the very best “pro adjacent” equipment available and for all intents and purposes is professional in results and up to my personal expectations.
For travel, street, studio and events, I am there no issue, but for sport and other pursuits, I may seem a little under done.
The key to me is to identify what is important and what is just not, then target the fixes needed.
This image came from a heavily cropped M43 20mp image, poorly processed in C1 (my first month of using it and I missed the “Brightness” slider). If I knew it was going to be effectively 40’ wide I may have had a litter or two of kittens! Others, outside of my control decided to use it in this role and never questioned the credentials of the file.
It is not uncommon for clients to ask for “X” number of pixels, RAW over jpeg, Brand “Y” or video in 4 to 8k. Never lie to them, but a little education can go a long way. If you must, supply what they ask for as best you can, but try to stop your eyes rolling the first time the quality is dropped at some point and allow them to see for themselves, that often these big values have little real effect.
My stills kit is pro level M43 Olympus and Panasonic, just not full frame. To these two brands and Fuji in APS-C, these are their pro cameras and lenses, their best foot forward. The issue is often one of perception, Canon, Nikon and Sony are in the habit of “demoting” their smaller sensor cameras to retain the status of their full frames (Canon does not ever mark a crop sensor lens with a red “L” ring, even if it is effectively the same design as the full frame version). This has always been their habit and it does nobody any good.
I can embellish my credentials with numbers like 80mp, 60 frames a second, 6k RAW video etc, but these are just as irrelevant as many other perceived needs and a poor measure of me as a person or photographer/videographer.
I know from experience that full frame makes little or no difference in real terms, but standing next to a shooter with a FF Nikon 600 f4 with my equivalent M43 300 f4 can be humbling, even when I know that I do just fine thanks. I also know that many full frame, high pixel shooters, shoot smaller sizes regulalrly. Some even use crop mode.
Oh and after a day on my feet, I am a little happier.
Nice to able to run up and down the field edge with a 600 f4 and 300 f2.8 in hand!
The reality is, I do not earn enough to afford the top end Nikon or Canon equivalents and if I bought them, I would have to work very hard just to justify their purchase and see some real results advances. I would most of all, have to specialise*.
Specialising in a small market, can be a road to oblivion, with a decent number of practitioners sharing limited opportunities or in some cases having to actually create a perceived need to fill.
My M43 kit allows me to be a 90 to 95%-er at most things, when probably 75% is enough, becasue no chain of events is perfect. I am a jack-of-all trades, which is actually ok and diversity adds skills that can be shared across the board.
Don’t get me wrong, there are actually advantages to the system as well. More reach, easier sensor size to design lenses and stabilisers for, smaller, lighter, cheaper, more flash power (useable wide apertures), more depth of field leading to some genuine class leading results in these.
Landscapes, wildlife, sport, studio, reportage, portraiture, travel, video, street. All are specifically catered to and each can add to the other. Doing that with full frame would be expensive, for me prohibitively so and in some cases (street, travel), they would be preferred kit anyway.
The same is true with video.
The S5 has the same sensor as its bigger and more expensive brethren, but tops out short of their full specs. It does however have the ability to upgrade as needed, which is important. I feel it is best to pay for enough now, with a growth doorway available, rather than go top end in a field that (a) you may not go further with or (b) may not find a customer for.
The S5 is my enabler for top end 1080 with 4k as an option. Going 6k etc is just too much, but getting less than semi-professional grade 120/1080 is also a deal breaker. Even my G9’s and EM1x’s in M43 format, pushed sideways into the video role are capable of great things.
I am very aware that well exposed and balanced Natural profile footage with a light touch in processing, from a slightly dated, not made to purpose G9 impresses many and satisfies most. It gives you the end result needed without some steps, that can be skipped if you are proficient.
*
Sound is in balance with that. My best sound is 32 bit WAV (optionally RAW) from a pair of Lewitt 040 condensers into an H5 Zoom, or the F1 with my SSH-6 shotgun capsule. Not the best available, but in balance with my video output, which is to say high end amateur or semi pro. Even the quick fix of the MKE 400 is plenty for many.
A Sennheisser MKE 600, used by the TV crews I am around often, into a Zoom F3 or F6 would be the next step, but that more than triples the price, doubles the bulk and is overkill for my needs. In some areas, where a shotgun mic is not the best choice, I can even do better.
Like my stills kit, my video and sound kit is a decent B+ in most areas with a myriad of problem solving options, all within a decently realistic budget. If I make any part better, the rest are out of balance. I learned this lesson years ago when I ran good stereo gear. Everytime I upgraded one part, the rest had to follow.
From an amateur or starter kit, to “best value in class” is a decent and smart step, the researching of which is a great learning process. The step up to best available is a rule of diminishing returns, often with an audience of one (you that is).
Use 32 bit Float sound from a $2000 mic, with 6k 4:4:4 video, or shooting full frame 45mp RAW and your output potential will often, probably always, be lost at some point in the chain and rarely be apppreciated by the average client.
Record poor 720i with camera only sound or shoot poorly exposed 8-bit jpegs and you will be able to see where you fell short, most of the time, but again, some clients will not know the difference unless you show them.
Old camera, kit lens. No need for more.
The middle path is, in my opinion, the best balance with reasonable capabilities.
Under buying against reason is not, but over buying is just as silly. If balanced, most of your kit will be used most of the time, sometimes it will be stretched, then skill can get you the rest of the way.
Professional means reliable and capable and skill is the one timeless, no compromise “tool” at your disposal.
It is very easy to get caught up in one specialised field and feel you need more (currently talking myself out of an F3 Zoom Float recorder), but before the “must have” monster gets a hold, ask your self two things;
Who will notice/know other than you?
and,
is overall balance retained?
Looking at the F3 for example, the F1 is easy to use, the bird in the hand and takes a module or 3.5 jack mic. the F3 needs XLR mics, of which I have two, but the H5 can handle these. It also lacks gain controls.
Self noise is the term that gets you when researching sound. There is always a measure that becomes obsessive and “noise” of some type is often the culprit.
I dealt with noise in one form or another most of my life. Analaogue tapes were rife with it, but the sound was good when you were not looking for the flaws, only heard between the music. Digital noise is defining the “quality” of modern cameras, but we used to embrace film grain as a creative tool.
Even the universe generates self noise. Noise is natural, a total lack of it is unnatural, clinical. Listen to the music, not the noise.
Often the answer to an issue you are having is not more or better gear.
Maybe the solution is to come at the problem from a different angle, maybe it is already sorted and usually, just getting on with the job will clarify what you really need. Overcoming obstacles is the mark of a professional. Sometimes that is gear, sometimes it is how you use it.
Travel well.
*A specialist sports shooter in full frame would be using a Nikon (or Canon/Sony equiv) Z9 with 600 f4 or 400 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 with a wide and possibly standard zoom and flash unit. About $25,000.
A Specialist landscape shooter would be using the best wide angle, high pixel count full frame for about $6000 minimum, but if they shoot wild life also, the above kit comes into play.
An EM1x, 300 f4, 40-150 f2.8 and 8-18 and flash come in at about $9,000 and are still over the top for some tasks.