Photography job - Rent lens?

[Bobbingtons]

Hey all, just looking for a bit of advice, basically I'm a really keen photographer with a fair few things published in the past couple of years, had stuff in national photography magazines, newspapers and a few ezines mostly competition winning stuff but not always. Anyways I'm only a student and my small student monies mean that I can't afford lens's, I had a job interview a few days ago at a photography studio, not as a photographer but for a marketing job. Well I just got a call back from them not for the marketing position as their still interviewing but as a part time photographer, they want me to go down in a few days and chat to them and do a studio shoot with them , they also want me to bring my gear which consists of a 450d and the 18-55 is lens.

They want me to do some shoots for a charity next month, do you reckon I should just go down to them with the 18-55 or rent a lens or two for the day so they don't dismiss me straight off the bat, I'd obviously rent more lens's for any shoots they want me to do. So should I rent something to go down with when I meet them so I don't look like some stupid kid or should I just go down and hope they like what I can do with a camera? Cheers.

 

[Mousse]

they want me to go down in a few days and chat to them and do a studio shoot with them , they also want me to bring my gear which consists of a 450d and the 18-55 is lens.

Try to get some info on what you'll be shooting. Unless it's something you'll need a different lense for, I see no reason to rent. I'd bring a portfolio of a few pictures to show off. If your prospective employer understand photography, they'd know the most important part of the camera is the 12 inches behind it.

 

[Consultant]

If you bring something else they would think you'll always have it. Just tell them what you have and see if they have some equipment you can use or if you should rent.

 

[gkarris]

Yes, the most important thing is to be honest. Plus, they probably know that a lot of people like to rent rather than invest in single lenses.

Equipment seems to be a lot though. I wanted a woman to take a pic of me at the airport and I chose her because she had a Canon XSi and the 55-200 IS lens. I handed her my 20D to take a pic and she wanted to know where the button was, and that if it was in automatic and whether or not it would focus... She said she just uses the "green square"...

Then shortly after, I switched lenses and used the really nice Nikon Zoom I rented and I was mistaken for the local Press....

 

[taylorwilsdon]

Sorry, I'm going to disagree. Rent a 24-70mm f/2.8 for the day. If I were a photographer hiring an assistant, and I saw someone with the kit lens, I might dismiss them as an amateur - even if they might be a better photographer than myself. Think of it this way - with the better lens, you'll have better results to show from that day, and as far as shallow first impressions go, you'll look more "professional" (whatever that means).

Image and impressions are important.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Sorry, I'm going to disagree. Rent a 24-70mm f/2.8 for the day. When I see someone with the kit lens, I dismiss them as an amateur - even if they might be a better photographer than myself. Think of it this way - with the better lens, you'll have better results to show from that day, and as far as shallow first impressions go, you'll look more "professional" (whatever that means).

Image and impressions are important. Make a good first one and don't come toting the Best Buy special that every soccer mom in suburbia is clicking away with.

If this is at all accurate then the OP needs to ditch the 450d. I mean, if we're discussing not looking like every soccer mom (because frankly a soccer dad would shoot Nikon right?). I'm just wondering since you seem to "dismiss" people as amateurs based on their gear. I've seen so many people toting the latest and greatest and they clearly have no clue or talent.


Bobbingtons your gear is just a tool and if you really have done what you have done in life then you've managed to prove every gear-geek out there that it's the person taking the picture not the equipment they use that matters. However, if you know you're going to be shooting that day you may want to find out what and where and rent a lens so that you can at least produce decent pictures. However, never let anyone tell you that you're less than something because you're not sporting a $10,000 setup in your bag. That is arrogant and speaks volumes about the lack of understanding a person truly has about the craft.

 

[soLoredd]

Sorry, I'm going to disagree. Rent a 24-70mm f/2.8 for the day. When I see someone with the kit lens, I dismiss them as an amateur - even if they might be a better photographer than myself. Think of it this way - with the better lens, you'll have better results to show from that day, and as far as shallow first impressions go, you'll look more "professional" (whatever that means).

Image and impressions are important. Make a good first one and don't come toting the Best Buy special that every soccer mom in suburbia is clicking away with.

Wow, what a generalization.

You know what's even better? Using the same setup as those "soccer moms in suburbia" and getting radically superior photos (btw, does that make me some kind of cross-gender goof because I shoot XSi?).

 

[toxic]

see if you can find out what they want you to shoot, and then decide, but i don't imagine it's anything demanding since it's in a studio.

as for first impressions...yes, that is something to consider, but i imagine they're asking you based on your portfolio. if they think your gear is unimpressive, they can give you money to get better gear.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

You can have every lense in the world, but it wont make you a better photographer. If you are taking great pictures with the 18-55 i would just stick with it instead of trying to force a different lense into the shoot so you 'look' professional. Let your photos do the talking, im sure they will be surprised when you take better shots than people with thousands of dollars of equipment.

 

[gerlan]

Hello Bobbingtons! They know you are a student and it sounds like you have impressed them with your enthusiasm. Go as you are, if they were interested in your equipment they would have asked!!!! Either they will lend you their own equipment or advise you otherwise when you next see them at the shoot you attend- if they want you to rent,ask them which supplier gives them the best discount and place your order on the back of your new association with them (then they will know you are professionally minded!)
If you are really unsure about making the wrong impression then talk to them, it won,t do any harm.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

Give me a break. A photography recruiter worth their salt knows that the body is far less important (especially in a portrait capacity) than the lens. A 450d would be a fine body, it has arguably better image quality than the 40d.

I knew my response would be unpopular, but its the truth. The kit lens is a dinky little plastic coated small aperture lens.

I'm not hiring for a photography job, so I don't dismiss anyone (just about every one of my friends with a SLR camera only has the kit lens and several of them have a better eye then I've ever had). If I were hiring for a photography job and the person showed up with the kit lens, I probably wouldn't hire them unless they had an impressive portfolio.

The OP hasn't showed us his portfolio, so I can't say anything, but I stand by what I said.

If this is at all accurate then the OP needs to ditch the 450d. I mean, if we're discussing not looking like every soccer mom (because frankly a soccer dad would shoot Nikon right?). I'm just wondering since you seem to "dismiss" people as amateurs based on their gear. I've seen so many people toting the latest and greatest and they clearly have no clue or talent.


Bobbingtons your gear is just a tool and if you really have done what you have done in life then you've managed to prove every gear-geek out there that it's the person taking the picture not the equipment they use that matters. However, if you know you're going to be shooting that day you may want to find out what and where and rent a lens so that you can at least produce decent pictures. However, never let anyone tell you that you're less than something because you're not sporting a $10,000 setup in your bag. That is arrogant and speaks volumes about the lack of understanding a person truly has about the craft.

 

[Phrasikleia]

Give me a break. A photography recruiter worth their salt knows that the body is far less important (especially in a portrait capacity) than the lens. A 450d would be a fine body, it has arguably better image quality than the 40d.

I knew my response would be unpopular, but its the truth. The kit lens is a dinky little plastic coated small aperture lens.

I'm not hiring for a photography job, so I don't dismiss anyone (just about every one of my friends with a SLR camera only has the kit lens and several of them have a better eye then I've ever had). If I were hiring for a photography job and the person showed up with the kit lens, I probably wouldn't hire them unless they had an impressive portfolio.

The OP hasn't showed us his portfolio, so I can't say anything, but I stand by what I said.

I tend to agree. It certainly would not hurt to show up with a serious lens, and it might hurt to show up with the kit lens. That the OP is even concerned shows he has some sense that looking professional matters to this client.

I was once visiting an office on business and saw a manager ask his secretary to turn away a consultant whom he'd seen pull up in the parking lot. The manager wanted her to turn this guy away even though they had a scheduled meeting. She later told me it was because the manager was underwhelmed by the car the consultant was driving, which was an older, average car of some sort. The manager took one look out the window and decided, based on the car, that this consultant wasn't "professional" enough.

 

[ChrisA]

As long as you show up to the job with a lens that is resonable for the asignment you will be OK.

If you were shotting for the general public then yes you can impress them with some expensive looking gear. but you impress profesionas with your results. You are shooting for a pro client, he will not be impressed with with gear, he has seen it all and likely knows that even an incompetent with a good day job can aford impressive gear.

Just bring what's needed. If that is the kit lens then good, if not then rent. But think of the shoot and what's required.

 

[wheelhot]

hmm, in my opinion, of course it will be great able to shoot wonderful photos with a kit lens beating people who own more expensive gear but to me, if the shots taken is going to be paid for, I will surely choose to get a better and more specific lens cause the kit lens has its limitations and anyway, to me it just irresponsible choosing to use the kit lens and not deciding to use better lenses just for bragging rights especially when you are getting paid for it.

In the end to me it is a photographer must know the limitation of his/her equipment, you can't just take a entry level camera body and kit lens hoping to get pro grade shots in a sports event or you can't expect to get a very good bokeh with a kit lens.

I always worry when someone going to go as a paid photographer for an event without the proper gear, especially those who say I want to prove that a entry level dSLR can take good shots, it's not that I am downgrading you or skeptical or something, it's just that to me it's irresponsible thinking that way when you might end up having your gear limiting you from taking that shot. Imagine what will happen in a wedding if the photographer cannot take the important moment cause the camera cannot get enough lighting. If I'm the client I will get furious.

So that is my 2 cents though, I'm sure many wont agree with me but again it is all about balance, a photographer need to know how to use his/her equipment too, as well knowing its limitation and how to make the best out of it. Hope my ramblings help

 

[compuwar]

They want me to do some shoots for a charity next month, do you reckon I should just go down to them with the 18-55 or rent a lens or two for the day so they don't dismiss me straight off the bat, I'd obviously rent more lens's for any shoots they want me to do. So should I rent something to go down with when I meet them so I don't look like some stupid kid or should I just go down and hope they like what I can do with a camera? Cheers.

You should find out what equipment the studio has lens-wise. If you're not going to own the copyright on the images, then they should be providing equipment or you should be getting paid more than a lowball figure. If they don't have the gear, have them cover the rental- it's a valid business expense and I'd start the "what are you bringing to the table" discussion if they haven't yet offered anything in that way.

If you've got stuff published with a kit lens, I wouldn't worry about what people think- I'd worry more about off-camera flash than I would what lens you use for a charity event- it's not like you're going to be producing 16x20 fine art prints. Image isn't as important as the images. All you have to do for the equipment posers is ask them how many publications their fancy equipment has gotten them into. If you can't drag the shutter, do well balanced fill flash and can't get the flash off the lens axis, that's what I'd sweat the most. Besides a flip bracket and mondo flash beat an expensive lens for most of the public anyway- unless you're going to haul a 400/2.8 in.

 

[gkarris]

...

Equipment seems to be a lot though. I wanted a woman to take a pic of me at the airport and I chose her because she had a Canon XSi and the 55-200 IS lens. I handed her my 20D to take a pic and she wanted to know where the button was, and that if it was in automatic and whether or not it would focus... She said she just uses the "green square"...

Then shortly after, I switched lenses and used the really nice Nikon Zoom I rented and I was mistaken for the local Press....

If this is at all accurate then the OP needs to ditch the 450d. I mean, if we're discussing not looking like every soccer mom (because frankly a soccer dad would shoot Nikon right?). I'm just wondering since you seem to "dismiss" people as amateurs based on their gear. I've seen so many people toting the latest and greatest and they clearly have no clue or talent.

LOL...

I guess I asked a Soccor Mom. Then I saw a guy with this huge bag and a Nikon D60, saw him change his lenses. But I noticed his lenses were those tiny AF-S ED lenses (here I am toting the Nikon 80-400 ED around). Pro? Then I saw his kids run up to him...

Think of it this way - with the better lens, you'll have better results to show from that day, and as far as shallow first impressions go, you'll look more "professional" (whatever that means).

Image and impressions are important.

Yes, some of the shots I got that day were awesome, compared to the dinky Canon kit lens (the 18-55 non IS, nonetheless).

hmm, in my opinion, of course it will be great able to shoot wonderful photos with a kit lens beating people who own more expensive gear but to me, if the shots taken is going to be paid for, I will surely choose to get a better and more specific lens cause the kit lens has its limitations and anyway, to me it just irresponsible choosing to use the kit lens and not deciding to use better lenses just for bragging rights especially when you are getting paid for it.

In the end to me it is a photographer must know the limitation of his/her equipment, you can't just take a entry level camera body and kit lens hoping to get pro grade shots in a sports event or you can't expect to get a very good bokeh with a kit lens.

I always worry when someone going to go as a paid photographer for an event without the proper gear, especially those who say I want to prove that a entry level dSLR can take good shots, it's not that I am downgrading you or skeptical or something, it's just that to me it's irresponsible thinking that way when you might end up having your gear limiting you from taking that shot. Imagine what will happen in a wedding if the photographer cannot take the important moment cause the camera cannot get enough lighting. If I'm the client I will get furious.

So that is my 2 cents though, I'm sure many wont agree with me but again it is all about balance, a photographer need to know how to use his/her equipment too, as well knowing its limitation and how to make the best out of it. Hope my ramblings help

A very well spent 2 cents!

OP - maybe you should rent at least a basic "L" lens for the day or two (give yourself time to shoot with it before hand).

 

[toxic]

just a reminder to everyone...
1. the OP has been published
2. he'll be in a studio. what lens doesn't look good at f/8?

 

[Flash SWT]

Well I just got a call back from them not for the marketing position as their still interviewing but as a part time photographer

In my opinion if they are hiring you as an employee they should be providing you with the gear to use on shoots. Especially if it is in studio, I've gotta imagine they have all the gear they need already.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Sorry, I'm going to disagree. Rent a 24-70mm f/2.8 for the day. If I were a photographer hiring an assistant, and I saw someone with the kit lens, I might dismiss them as an amateur - even if they might be a better photographer than myself. Think of it this way - with the better lens, you'll have better results to show from that day, and as far as shallow first impressions go, you'll look more "professional" (whatever that means).

Image and impressions are important.

Hate to think that it comes down to what you can buy verses what the eye brings to the game

If this is at all accurate then the OP needs to ditch the 450d. I mean, if we're discussing not looking like every soccer mom (because frankly a soccer dad would shoot Nikon right?). I'm just wondering since you seem to "dismiss" people as amateurs based on their gear. I've seen so many people toting the latest and greatest and they clearly have no clue or talent.


Bobbingtons your gear is just a tool and if you really have done what you have done in life then you've managed to prove every gear-geek out there that it's the person taking the picture not the equipment they use that matters. However, if you know you're going to be shooting that day you may want to find out what and where and rent a lens so that you can at least produce decent pictures. However, never let anyone tell you that you're less than something because you're not sporting a $10,000 setup in your bag. That is arrogant and speaks volumes about the lack of understanding a person truly has about the craft.

Amen to that!

Saw some stuff from a PJ that is using only the Olympus C5050's IIRC....

I was once visiting an office on business and saw a manager ask his secretary to turn away a consultant whom he'd seen pull up in the parking lot. The manager wanted her to turn this guy away even though they had a scheduled meeting. She later told me it was because the manager was underwhelmed by the car the consultant was driving, which was an older, average car of some sort. The manager took one look out the window and decided, based on the car, that this consultant wasn't "professional" enough.

Sad statement Hope that guy falls on his you know what at some point... that consultant could have owned a home much better than that manager, and had some travel experiences that manager could only dream of - only because he thought of of the car some one drives...

In the end the OP needs to ask what sort of "look" they might want in the sample shoot... that will drive the choice in a lens to bring along...

 

[compuwar]

I was once visiting an office on business and saw a manager ask his secretary to turn away a consultant whom he'd seen pull up in the parking lot. The manager wanted her to turn this guy away even though they had a scheduled meeting. She later told me it was because the manager was underwhelmed by the car the consultant was driving, which was an older, average car of some sort. The manager took one look out the window and decided, based on the car, that this consultant wasn't "professional" enough.

I used to work for a guy who owned three airplanes. For a few months, he drove a battered old utility truck until it died on the side of the road (before that, it'd been lent out to one of the small airports he usually flew to so they could plow the runways and stuff.) It was actually pretty funny how many *other people* were embarrassed for him to be driving it. He didn't care- he could have been driving *anything* he wanted, but he just wasn't that wrapped up about cars. He really wanted a JetRanger, but after 9/11 the ADIZ went back into effect and his house was too close to DC to be able to land it in the back yard.

People who judge someone's performance based upon looks are idiots. Back when I worked for Gannett, some idiot salesween came into a meeting with the USA Today .com folks- they were all shirt and tie, sports coat or suit. I was wearing urban cammo BDUs and a t-shirt that probably said "Got root?" or "I read your email." The idiot talked for about half an hour, making eye contact with the "decision makers in suits" and everyone at the table *but* me. If you're not smart enough to understand that the guy who gets to ignore the dress code in a Fortune 200 company has more power than the folks who can't- then it's not going to go well. I was the only one with any real questions. He couldn't answer half of them at all and the rest poorly. Then they explained to him that if I didn't approve it as I was from "corporate" they couldn't even think of purchasing it. The look on his face was priceless.

 

[gkarris]

^^^ Great story, but unfortunately, especially in a creative field, like design and photography, IMAGE IS EVERYTHING (like that old Canon Rebel commercial? )

My work story is I was fixing the computer in our guest cubicle. Then some outside service guy needed some help with something (I can't remember). I told him I was the local IT guy and I could help him.

Naturally, he thought that was my cubicle... he sort of treated me a bit lowly.

Later, I told him he had to follow me to my office to get this cable he needed. Then he saw my office (my company gave me a really nice big office) - then his attitude towards me changed...

 

[wheelhot]

Yup, I agree that a photographer image effects first impression, I know this is not a good attitude but I can't shook it of my head, maybe I'm jealous or something, I once saw a few photographers with kit lens and a bunch of 3rd party lenses and 3rd party flash taking photos for an event and has the tag around with them, for some unknown reason I started looking down at them eventhough I am very much aware that it's about the photographer and not the gear. I have never had this feeling though when I see an event photographer using Canon L lens or Nikon FX lenses or with Canon or Nikon flashes. Still wonder why I feel jealous till today though

 

[Phrasikleia]

The point for the OP is not what's "right" for his client to think, but what is prudent for the OP to do in order to get the job.

 

[compuwar]

The point for the OP is not what's "right" for his client to think, but what is prudent for the OP to do in order to get the job.

Which is why I suggested a big flash bracket and flash- at an event, that'll impress all the non-photographers a lot more than a lens they have no clue about. It'll also have more effect on the images, which means the results will be better. Obviously, that depends a lot on the event, but trying to do G&Gs without it will be a bigger challenge than it's worth.

 

[Mousse]

^^^ Great story, but unfortunately, especially in a creative field, like design and photography, IMAGE IS EVERYTHING (like that old Canon Rebel commercial? )

Well then, the OP is not going to impress anyone in a studio by bringing a DSLR. Even a 1Ds mkIII will be considered a toy in studio. He'll need get at least a Hassleblad and a P25 (or maybe a P65+) digital back to run with the big dogs.

In my book, that whole "Image is everything" only applies to the images taken.