I think that's the most intelligble definition of "pro camera" I've ever seen, Jens. :-)
We've been through this on PDML a lot of times, sometimes even diverging into a flame war over it, which was too bad. The definition begs the question what constitutes a professional photographer, but I seriously don't think that's the relevant question. I think what's relevant is what people *in general* think of as a professional photographer. I asked some of my non-photographing colleagues at work this question a while back, over lunch. A recently married woman mentioned her wedding photographer first, and then went on to the photojournalists covering the invasion of Iraq. She remembered the case of the photographer who was caught combining two pics from the same scene. As the discussion around the table rose, a consensus emerged on press photographers being the most prominent examples of a professional photographer. In their mind, this class included both PJs, sports photographers, papparazzies and general news photographers. The portrait photographers came second, and someone threw in a word for nature photographers and photo artists towards the end as an afterthought. In general, I think this demonstrates that people have a short memory and tend to associate "professional photographer" with their last encounter with any photographer who makes a living from pictures. Since most people read newspapers and watch sports events on TV, that's what sticks in their minds. Jostein ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Anyway, when a manufacturor manages to meet the demands of professinal > photgrapher, this camera becomes a pro camera.
