I guess there is only one type of "professional" photography. It is a pity documentary photographers are not "professional." And certainly we cannot use MFD for simply a hobby. Gee, I never knew I could not use my camera like I have been using it.:loco:
I love GetDPI. You are the third member to imply I am not professional. I get my work published. I get my work exhibited. My clients like my work. But because I don't use cameras in a way others deem to be "correct," I must not actually have a real career in photography? But why share experiences? Maybe Guy could simply post the ten steps of what "professionals" do and we could just refer to that if we have questions. It would certainly lighten the traffic around here and we wouldn't have to bother to post.
Peace friend. I am just always coming up against the commercial photographers in the neighborhood. You do your thing and may you proper by it. I will do the same.
Personally, I didn't take David's post to mean you weren't a professional, he just outlined "his" professional requirements for an end result ... which you have to admit is a pretty common criteria for professional applications of MFD type gear, but most certainly
not the only criteria.
How anyone uses their gear whether doing so for money or not, is their business. Who can argue with success?
As a very looooog time MFD user both for personal and professional applications, I would be remiss to not share my opinion that MFD is a more stringent task master compared for example to the M9
that the original question was referencing ... which somewhat set the criteria.
This is where science comes in and cannot be discounted as a myth. The M9 is famous for lower shutter speed hand-held work because it doesn't have a mirror, and there is no mechanism analog or electronic mechanically stopping down the lens aperture. In addition the camera is very shallow and doesn't have much weight hanging out front (unless it's a Notilux or fast 75/90 mm optic) thus placing it closer to the center of gravity formed by the human bi-pod holding it
. In essence, it is tantamount to shooting a DSLR of any size with a pancake lens, hand-held with the mirror up and the lens stopped down
However, the S2 form factor does promote use that many (not all) would consider a bit iffy for MFD applications. That is both its charm and its danger. It all heavily depends on expectations for the end result. One person's criteria may be heavily skewed toward of the moment content (like documentary approaches), and there is a certain amount of leeway regarding adherence to conventional expectations that most MFD users would set as their criteria.
I'm a bit in both camps as are quite a few other S2 users. Because I know my habit of pushing any piece of gear beyond it's conventional limits, I try to prepare for it. I have a dual lug hand-strap on my S2 and at least carry a mono-pod with me ... which I do not use as often as I should, but am fast learning that it is a good idea when possible an not restrictive to the desired creative approach. This camera has one center AF point, isn't image stabilized, and currently is limited to ISO 1250. In comparison, my Sony A900 has multiple AF points (that I DO use), can be shot at ISO 3200 (or even 6400 in a pinch with good exposure technique), and every lens I put on it is Image Stabilized.
The final measure as to whether a S2 is right for you is your applications and your criteria for the end result.
-Marc