When you put a Canon 5D Mark IV and an L series lens up against an entry level Canon with kit lens, you're obviously going to get better results with the more expensive option. But are the results 10 times worth the price?
How many different ways can you say that it's not the tools that create the masterpiece, but rather the person using them? A piano doesn't compose a concerto, a typewriter doesn't write a great novel, a camera doesn't make a great photo. The list could go on and on, however, I think we can all agree that, by and large, when you pay more for a certain piece of technology or tool of the trade, you get something of a higher quality with more features and benefits. But are those features, benefits, and results worth the extra price that you pay? And if you pay 10 times more, are your results 10 times better? It's difficult to answer these questions, because results and criteria might be subjective, and one person may have a different standard of grading than another. Be that as it may, The School of Photography's Marc Newton has put a Canon 5D Mark IV paired with a Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L lens up against an old Canon 1200D with 18-55mm kit lens for your viewing pleasure. That entry level DSLR body has been discontinued in many countries but you can still get an entry level Canon DSLR with an 18-55mm kit lens included for about $400. One thing I must point out is that Newton's video emphasizes the point that the more expensive pairing is $4,000, but the 1200D is only $200, however it should be noted that he's using the price of an old secondhand 1200D model he picked up, which I didn't think was apples and apples.
So, what of the results? Ultimately, whether one set of images is 10 times the quality of the other images will be subjective, and there may be other factors that you look for when you outlay for gear. But do have a look and let me know your thoughts in the comments below. How did the Canon powerhouse stack up to the cheaper version?