How much does gear matter?

I think the real question behind this question is does obsessing about the minute differences among a certain base level of competent gear matter.

And the answer is no.

Does 35mm look different than medium format than large format? Sure. Do you need a long lens to photograph birds or sports or whatever. Yes.

Does it matter if you use an X Pro 1 or an X Pro 2 to take pictures of your cat? No.

The internet is useful to figure out what kind of tool you might need to fulfill a certain vision. And even to choose among the specific choices. However there is a point of diminishing returns where the Canon vs Nikon (now Fuji vs Sony) debates are really just a form of masturbation.
 
I like the interviews with famous photogs who say gear doesn't matter, as they lean on their top model Hasselblads/Nikons/Canons/Rolleis etc.

For me what matters is if I enjoy using the gear, because that means I will create with it.
Unfortunately that usually happens with the higher end stuff.
 
I enjoy using my 1930 Leica I with a 1932 Leitz Elmar. Its quirky, makes you think, and kind of a pain to use, honestly. But the quality of the resulting photos always surprises me. And I've had lots of fun conversations with strangers asking me about "that old camera".

Likewise, when I fire up my Nikon Z6 & 50mm S, I am amazed at how effortless photography can be. The quality of the resulting photos always impresses me. Sometimes, people look at me with suspicion ("what's he doing with that camera??").

Sometimes, after using the Z6 a while, I wonder why I bother with the Leica I. Until I pick it up again and shoot a roll.
 
Guess it all depends on what considers gear to be 'best'. As a commercial photographer, I want my equipment to work for me every time I pull it out of the bag, and I have to have a number of backups in case one of those pieces of equipment decides that it doesn't.

Additionally, having the right/best gear for the job is also essential. For example, I shoot a lot of architectural work for builders, interior designers, property management companies, architects etc, and I'd really be restricted if I didn't have my perspective control lenses. Unfortunately they can be expensive, but if you need them, you need them. Same with lighting, heavy tripods, sand bags, etc etc etc.

I'm also having to deal with what clients want, and then having to purchase equipment to meet their needs. I never had any interest in video until a number of clients starting asking for it about 15 years ago. Oh well, guess I gotta get into video now! Drones? I was dragged kicking and screaming into that, but now I do that too. I could have always just said no to all of this, but then the clients would have just gone someplace else and I would have lost the client.

On another, completely different note, I always remember the first days of undergrad and the first days of grad school. You'd meet all these new students and invariably a few of them will have brought their cameras with them into class. I recall one fellow in undergrad who had the then-new F4s with all the bells and whistles, big lens blah blah blah. I thought 'gee this guy must be a really great photographer' and I felt very intimidated. After the class had its first critique and I finally saw his work, I was no longer intimidated. Same thing happened the first day of grad school -- a student had her 500CM with her, and like that first day in undergrad I felt a pang of intimidation. First critique in class, saw her work, was no longer intimidated.

I've had numerous people comment on my camera equipment when I'm out and about - whether it's with any of my Leicas, or whatever else I might happen to be carrying at the time. Oftentimes their reaction is "Man you must be a great photographer!" My response is always - and I mean always: "All this demonstrates is that I know how to spend money. And I am VERY good at doing that!"
 
Damaso said:
I just think about what HCB and Capa were shooting on every time I think I "need" the latest and greatest. The vast majority of us aren't limited by our gear, we're limited by our ability or training.

Good gear can make things easier for sure but that's not always the best way to learn....
Click to expand...

Both were using good gear. Leican, Contax, etc. Not exactly "limiting".
 
I knew a guy who had a Phoenix camera made to look like an SLR but in essence a Point-n-Shoot with a crappy viewfinder. He took crappy pictures. I knew a girl who had a 500c and a pristine 80mm. She captured phenomenal images.

Just wanted to balance out all the sucky photographer with great camera stories 😛
 
chipgreenberg said:
Not long after I stopped working for these guys I heard Dave was also going through a nasty divorce.

I got two take-aways from this.

1. Having the best gear didn’t make you the best photographer.
2. Too much time interviewing models was a hazard to your married life.

What do you think? More or less relevant today in the digital age?
Click to expand...

I sincerely hope that Paul and Dave (Paul particularly) worked out their nasty divorces and are living better lives.

If Paul didn't have access to MF gear, and the client wanted MF images, Paul would have been out of luck. That's one of the obstacles in client work, having access to gear that will capture what the client wants. The other side is if your skills are sufficient to bridge that gap without the gear, and if this is possible.

Smaller and smaller gear is filtering into Hollywood. The Arri Alexa is the camera of choice, but they are massive $70,000 cameras that are designed for two or three people to operate. Then you get Keanu Reeves' Knock Knock, which was shot on the $6000 Canon 1Dc DSLR with Zeiss cinema lenses, and it looks great. Today, you can buy a Panasonic S1H which shoots in 5.6K and is Netflix approved. I can do things with my Panasonic GH4 that my Canon 5D Mark II cannot, video wise.

We've arrived at a technological level where a decent camera from even ten years ago still creates professional level work as long as you have the skills to do it, and the client requirements are not outside the scope of the gear. Depending on the job, you may need different equipment; no new-fangled mirrorless camera will replace a drone. You can't shoot flash-style images without a flash. You can't freeze action with a large format camera. It all depends on the client requirements, or your own personal threshold for what you deem acceptable.
 
Vince Lupo said:
On another, completely different note, I always remember the first days of undergrad and the first days of grad school. You'd meet all these new students and invariably a few of them will have brought their cameras with them into class. I recall one fellow in undergrad who had the then-new F4s with all the bells and whistles, big lens blah blah blah. I thought 'gee this guy must be a really great photographer' and I felt very intimidated. After the class had its first critique and I finally saw his work, I was no longer intimidated. Same thing happened the first day of grad school -- a student had her 500CM with her, and like that first day in undergrad I felt a pang of intimidation. First critique in class, saw her work, was no longer intimidated."
Click to expand...

I kind of went through that with video production. In my early days, I hadn't made the connection that good gear =/= good work, even though I knew this from still photography. Over the years, I've seen people with good gear make poor work, and lesser gear make great work. Education is similar - I met a guy who had studied media and film at RMIT (well known uni in Australia), and his work was atrocious. I've also seen the work of educated DoP's and directors that is excellent, and work by untrained people that is incredible.
 
One of my favorite photographers- Helmut Newton used all sorts of gear over the years and did some amazing work, be that 35mm point and shoot or medium format pro camera.
 
Does anyone else feel that gear (with the exception of the exotic or overhyped) is phenomenally accessible these days? The problem of whether or not I can afford the "right" gear to make "good" photos has long given way to the tyranny of choice. The idea that someone could do better work with a more expensive camera seems even less relevant today when legendary pro cameras can be bought for the price of a brick of film, and even digital cameras from over a decade ago still produce images you'd be hard pressed to take any reasonable issue with.

It's a bit ironic to me then that given the choices my most used (and usable) camera that was never expensive in the first place; a plasticky, early, consumer Canon EOS body, which for me is a much better choice than the Leica M I thought I "needed" - a discovery I made way too late.
 
nightfly said:
I think the real question behind this question is does obsessing about the minute differences among a certain base level of competent gear matter.
Click to expand...

Yes this was obviously my question. I had a friend who was a still life guy but liked tennis and shot the US Open every year. He didn't bring his 4x5. He borrowed stuff from Nikon pro services.

But if he was a Canon user and borrowed stuff from Canon would it matter?
 
Larry Cloetta said:
I wonder how many people who tell others that gear doesn’t matter have only one camera and one lens.
Click to expand...

I basically shoot with one camera and one lens. I am lucky enough that I could own all the gear I want, but this fits my current shooting style and I'm very happy with the results. Personally I may not suffer from GAS because in my previous life I've owned suitcases of Blad's ,RZ's ,Sinars, Nikons (never used unless somebody was doing a slide show. before powerpoint) so I never really go down that "I wonder if I had X" road.
 
I`m not afraid to say it... I have GAS always... but only for new Fujifilm gear. It is part of the fun. That said, I photograph a lot and I always like the gear I have.

Some of you have it rough... jonzing after all of those vintage cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Godfrey
A pleasant few moments today ...
Replies
3
Views
356
chuckroast
C
A
What is the MOST gear you've ever carried on a trip?
2
Replies
34
Views
612
spatumba
spatumba
A
The mystery photographer of '60s San Francisco and undeveloped Kodachrome
Replies
16
Views
1K
bcostin
bcostin
A
Burning Kodachrome slides and erasing history
Replies
8
Views
498
Dogman
Dogman
A
The Quadrant Model of Gear vs Output
Replies
10
Views
657
Guth
G
Back
Top Bottom