Isn't the Canon t2i the Canon 550D in Europe? The 550D body cost about 700€ (in Germany, might be nearly the same price in the US) when it was released in 2010. Don't understand me wrong, your pictures are amazing and I know it's not just because of the camera. But I think you missed the challenge you set to yourself. You have shown that you can get a great camera for less than 200$ and shouldn't mind the age of 7 years. But it was a 700€/$ camera nevertheless and not the cheapest you could get. In my point of view, it would have been more impressive, if you had bought a camera which was never more expensive than 200€/$ to begin with.

It would be great if you would show also photos before using photoshop to compare Those look great and with good light and postprocessing skills you can do a lot of magic even with shittiest camera. So I would like to admire your photoshop/LR skills more! :)

What you should do is an actual comparison. Take the same photo with 3 different cameras and see how they turn out -- without any Photoshop editing. You can get a Kodak Disc camera on eBay for about $10. Then your choice for the other two cameras.

Beautiful. It looks almost magical. You, mister, have a pure talent.

..& i would additionally like to add that i can see a ‘style’ that can be achieved with even these silly little disposable cameras as you have ‘smarts’ in creativity, i am sure here! Please however do enjoy your ‘works’,& stay in that mind frame.Do understand many are going to say that your choice of camera is good to start with, this is true however with most newer smart phones the camera is darn good & i have seen amazing shots done on these/& crappy ones;bottom line one Must have some skill,& you do, a lot.I upvote you on being courages in this critical harsh world..pls keep yourself well, this is so much more important for i might be great @ many an Art/& even Natural medicine,& this reason is for balance as i live with a cruel rare sickness.Dont allow ills’ to hold your life back, as it can!

Great !

Just wanted to share. 0523151203...715839.jpg

They think that they are trying to belittle the photographer by saying it is the equipment. The reality is anyone with an ounce of intelligence knows that people who make rude comments like that are really just making excuses for their own lack of motivation or drive to learn and create anything. If photography is not their priority, fine, but if it is you find a way no matter what. I am a single mom of three, I am low income, but I LOVE photography so much...I started with a film camera, eventually was given a digital as a gift because someone saw my passion and drive with my cheap flea market film camera...and when that started to die after 10 years I entered a photography contest to WIN a new camera. I told myself if I wasn't good enough to win a camera I didn't deserve it. And I won that camera and that is what I work with today, cost me nothing!! Also gimp is a free alternative to photoshop. If it's in you, there are NO EXCUSES!

I totally agree with Phillip, this is an art form. You can take outstanding images with a pin hole camera and it really does not get cheaper than that (from the film and print days). People saying they could take great images if they had the right expensive gear are likened to those who say great chefs make it because of their expensive knives and pots.

Love those pictures-amazing! The concept as well : ) PS. Telling someone they take only good pictures because of a good camera is the same as telling piano prodigies the only reason their playing is good is because of the grand concert piano.

I read an interview with a guy who shot weddings. When he'd pull out his medium format people would scoff about what pretentious overkill it was. Then he'd grab the DSLR and it would about how he's cookie cutter and uncle Jim has a bette camera. Then he pulled out a digital Leica and people would laugh at the stupid consumer camera in his hands. You've received PR from your exercise so have at it, but for most of us; don't worry about what other people give credit to. It's an exercise in futility. My own way of dealing with it was to use the most DIY stuff for lighting I could make (even though I have all the good stuff) just to mess with people who snicker, until they see the back of the camera. It's petty of me, but the reactions are priceless when they start to give you instant respect. People crediting the camera are just making it about themselves so they can have an excuse as to why they can't do it. Ignore them. They're just having a bad....life.

Well done! Prove the haters wrong. 😇

Ansel Adams cameras were not as good as that you can find today, but his vision and his dark room editing( IE processing) is what made his pictures. While good equipment can help, it is still the person behind the camera to make good photos. While visiting the museum I saw his prints, the one thing I wished was that they show a couple of straight prints to show his actual vision.

Amazing photos!

Love the vision :)

those are edited so not the camera or the photo its the effect

Those boys are so adorable!

I shoot with analog cameras, and this photo was taken with smena 8m that cost me just $ 5... F1000030-5...5a3b3a.jpg

If anyone actually wants a good quality and affordable 10 in 1 Phone Lens Kit, I just bought this one at https://aweandco.com/products/10-in-1-phone-lens-kit and it is honestly awesome!

Okay, it still has something to do with the camera - there are cameras which one could buy for less than $100 - but they take awful, low-resolution photos which would require extreme editing not to look fatal. But of course, the actual photography art is a combination of the photographing skills, the technology used (camera) and the editing skills (if the photo is actually edited). If you're a bad photographer, your photos might possibly still look bad, even when holding a camera which costs some thousand dollars.

I think that it's cute that you think that $200 is cheap. Let's use your cell phone or a $50 camera. I do agree that to some degree it is taking the time to envision what you want to create. Figuring out lighting and angles, color and perspective is just as important as having the right equipment.

I just think what difference does it make what kind of camera you are using if the pictures are going to be photoshop'd within and inch of their life? They are very beautiful, though. Good job.

I agree with you. I have a 1970's F3 that I shoot film through, and although its 40 years old, the lenses are scratched and the shutter is slow, its the eye of the photographer that knows how to set the image, look at the light, figure out the direction of motion, looks, eyes, body position, natural positions etc. The camera allows for capturing more than we ever could before, but it still takes the artist to see the image and make the camera do the work.

Most of the very best pictures I've ever seen (and taken) were with a cheap SLR and cheap lens. The key is knowing how to use a camer's features, light and composition. Some of the worst pictures I've ever seen were taken with expensive smartphone "cameras". The worse SLR is still superior to the best smartphone. Phone pushers know that, that's why they're pushing attachments to make their pathetic smartphone cameras more SLR-like. The problem is when all you as a picture viewer see is smartphone c**p, you begin to thing it's actually good.

Great photos, but would you mind posting an overview of your PP workflow? I'd be very interested to see the difference between the out-of-camera shots and the final images. You certainly have talent though, that's for sure. I've been shooting digital for more than 10 years, and some of my best shots were on my lowly 500D with the kit lens when I started.

Isn't a $200 camera (specially if it costs that second handed) a professional camera already? When I think cheap I think of cameras that don't even take lenses and even those tend to get too expensive. And then... I wonder how these photos looked just as photos, no editing. Editing is a whole other realm of skill and one can get the most plain looking photo and make something unbelievable out of it as long as they have enough skill, right? So with that I have two things to say, 1, this post doesn't prove anything, if you want to prove something to the regular people, use regular items, most regular Joe's don't even know why a camera uses a lense. 2 and most important, if you know your skill and you believe in your work, don't worry about what other people think. Do what you do best and let other's opinions just pass by.

Prove it using film camera.