Why?!?

I agree, One time when I was picking up my pictures, the girl behind the counter saw some of them and asked me what kind of camera I had. I told her it was a Minolta, She said,"ohhh they take great pictures". I answered "yeah they take some pretty lousy ones too."

It's true what you say. I completely agree. Cameras don't decide what it's going to photograph. It's the individual, who decides what the camera will photograph. After all, cameras do not have the capacity to make any form of decision. So, it's stupid to think that the better the camera, the better the picture.

When we talk about photo quality, these factors should be accounted in the flow diagram of its processing; photo technique, photo management and photo editing. Photo Technique - of course it included the features availability installed in your camera. The twist and turn inside it especially it is a digital camera supplied with night vision. Nowadays, experts in handling, managing and controlling those installed features would make you looks like a professional photographer on the outcome of your photo. [b] Photo Management[/b] - it depends on which photo program installed in your computer. So that your manage your snapped photo to be well organized complied with the program. [b] Photo Editing[/b] - again need a technical-know-how on the Photo Management for editing tasks. That's all what I can contribute my idea when you discuss about the quality of one photo, the outcome.

They believe it because, to a large degree, it is true! People familiar with my work may be surprised at that answer, but consider: first, if better cameras did not make better photos, no pro would spend more than a few dollars on their equipment... but the more you know, the more experience and skill you have, the more you appreciate the limitations of cheaper cameras;second, since expensive cameras tend to be used by better photographers, there is a correlation between the price tag and the results: secondly, while the price of a better camera is in part the cost of better, often lighter materials, better weather seals, more robust mechanicals and more advanced electronics, they also have brighter viewfinders, faster response rates, higher pixel counts, wider ISO ranges and better noise suppression. They can take excellent pictures in places and situations where it isn't even worth taking a lesser camera out of its case; thirdly, they produce much larger digital files, carrying more data and permitting a much wider colour gamut. Where cheaper devices are limited to 8 bits per pixel, a digital slr can write 14 bit RAW and TIF files. And finally, photographers with cheaper cameras see their photos, compare them with their friends' pictures, made with similarly priced cameras or phones and come to expect no better; then they see similar photos produced by a high-quality (read more expensive) camera and the difference is so obvious they just have to comment! Now tell me, would you swap you camera for a cheaper one? I mean, if a good photographer can make great pictures with any camera.... I would be very surprised if many photographers would be willing to downgrade. I bet you wouldn't! Hey - those people aren't underrating your skill; they are just trying to pay you a compliment; why not accept it and move on!

My opinion, both camera and the person that decide the quality of the pictures. A good camera takes good pictures. But an experienced person with a good camera takes great pictures. I have a good camera. The brand is Canon. It's the first time I have a camera. At first, I took a lot of terrible pictures. After sometimes, I've become more experience in taking pictures, I started took some great pictures. What I'm trying to point out here is that is not just about the person. Its also involve the camera because everything in this world doesn't comes alone. It must have its pair... Enjoy myLotting..

I do agree that it is the person that makes great pictures. But if you are already good, a good camera will make the task easier and it will allow you to be more versatile.