We often tell beginners that gear does not matter for the sake of preventing people from falling into a trap of spending money on equipment instead of improving their technique, but it is not a simple black and white issue. This great video discusses the situations in which the gear you are using actually does make a difference.
Coming to you from YC Imaging, this excellent video discusses the issue of when gear actually matters for creating specific images. It is easy for beginners and advanced professionals alike to fall into the trap of thinking more expensive gear will solve problems, when the majority of the time, practice and education are what are actually needed to improve. On the other hand, it is not a totally binary thing; there are certainly times when better or more specialized gear will actually make a difference or even enable shots that simply would not be possible otherwise. For example, sports photographers often need those top-end wide-aperture supertelephoto lenses to get images given the environments they work in. That being said, the majority of the time, working on your technique or ideas will solve the problem. Check out the video above for the full rundown.
.
Obviously, the real question is how, why, and when it matters, and the answer is sometimes "not at all".
.
And many others do not, or are misled to think that spending more will make their output better.
FWIW, I've been a full-time event pro for 12 years.
And, as I noted elsewhere, often gear "matters" in obscure or counterintuitive ways. For example, having multiple mid-range bodies with identical controls is worth a whole lot more in my work than having just one expensive camera. As is having a camera that's easy to lug up mountains or carry on all-day walks, or one that fits in a shirt pocket. Too often, these "gear matters" conversations devolve into simplistic "Camera X is the BEST camera" diatribes about technical matters that make no difference in the average Joe's 12"x18" print.
.
I look at my past pictures and immediately I notice grain. Grain everywhere. My current camera truly captures beyond quality I can perceive.
In the early years of digital, lots of photographers actually ADDED grain to their images because grainless images were perceived as "plasticky". As a former film shooter, I like my printed images to have a little "tooth" to them, especially on matte or semi-gloss papers.
The answer to this question can be found in next weeks post titled ‘why gear doesn’t matter’ and it’s follow-up post, probably titled ‘why gear matters so much’, probably by the same author.
The biggest limiting factor for gear IMHO is your ability to "get it right in-camera". If your composition is such that you don't need to crop and the light is such that you don't need to adjust very much in post, your gear mostly makes your images more forgiving in post or in capturing an image. Better high ISO performance, better dynamic range, better autofocus, more megapixels, sharper lenses - most of the time this doesn't really matter if you just get it right in-camera.
Personally, I love the forgiveness that a large sensor and good glass provides. I need all the help I can get :)
In my work, I find that HOW a camera works is even more important than marginal technical differences between image quality from sensors, say, one or two format sizes apart. In fast-paced work like events, responsiveness and ease of use can make the difference between getting the shot and not.
So true, and it's sort of what I was getting at. We can't always take our time, our subjects won't always wait for us or sit still. When our gear gets in the way of getting the shot, it starts to matter a lot!
Gear does matter, but not for the reasons that most early stage photographers think. It is not the latest tech, or the coolest feature that matters. I've been taking photos for 65 plus of my 78 years and I have used a lot of "gear" and own a lot of gear today. Part of my "gear" is a tripod that is over fifty years old. My gear is tailored to the images I shoot. Some is newer (like my camera bodies) and some is really old. Over half of my lenses are well over ten years old. I replace gear when it wears out. It has been a long time since I got rid of the "I want" and replaced it with "I need." Phones today are more capable than 90% of the cameras I've owned over my lifetime.
A lot of my many, many gear upgrades and additions over the past 12 years have been largely optional and done more for my convenience than for any technical image quality benefit to the client. I could still do my event work with a pair of Canon 40Ds and five lenses today. Most of my work these days goes online and nowhere else.
For the past 6 years I've been quite happy with my extensive Micro Four Thirds kit for corporate event work, but I recently sank about $10k into Sony a7[x] gear to complement, not replace, it. It just lets me do some things easier and get crisper images in the very dimmest light. Not that my clients would ever notice...
.
I'm not even wasting my time to read this crap. Gear matters 99% of the time otherwise NONE of us would be using the best gear we can afford! I know damn well most of you at FStopper are gear envy and always have to have the latest and greatest and then try and post CRAP like the New iPhone is better, show up to a wedding and see how far that gets you. But of click baits, dead horse beating nonsense you guys post anymore.
Why bother posting, then? Clearly, the simplistic question is just an opening for a dialogue about how gear choices affect working methods and end results. For many uses, "better" gear makes no practical difference, so any suggestion that it always "matters" is unhelpful to folks unfamiliar with how to match gear to specific uses.
In short, your rant is every bit as simplistic as the question to which you object. The difference is that you allow for no further discussion. You're in the wrong place.
I posted simply bc it's moronic to think the best gear would not yield the best results. And sure that comes down to price, never skill. You give two complete beginners, one a Nikon D3200 with a kit lens and the other a Nikon D850 with a 85 1.4G and tell them to shoot the same exact person at the same exact time, I promise you the second person's will be night and day better. In short, mine needs no further discussion because YOU ALL are walking proof for me. YOU ALL gear yourself with the best you can afford and have way more than you "need". So no, I'm in the right place when I say these topics are full of crap and nothing but clickbait, otherwise you all would use iPhone's and hashtag #GearDontMatter lol.
If you only tell the 2 beginners to shoot the same person at the same exact time but without any other instructions I wouldn´t bet my money on either getting the best shot. Both could easily misfocus, choose the wrong shutter speed etc which would ruin the image regardless of the camera being used.
You're absolutely correct. Better yet, let a "professional", set each one up on a tripod, manually set the EXACT settings, click click. Better? haha
That might do.
Again, simplistic to the point of being useless.
Exactly.
It matters when you don't have it...
Gear matters, the proof is all the improvements in smartphone cameras and people buying them for the results they produce (or addiction). It's the question of what kind of gear matters to shoot what by who.
Obviously phase one is not the right tool for shooting soccer or sports. Likewise, smartphone is not the right tool for ICM, etc. Also you may not want to carry heavy gears for family vacation, just to shoot few for memories. You'd rather go with a smartphone with a good camera or lighter single lens camera (or something lighter, but changeable lens).
Gear matters in every sense. It's just the matter of choosing the right gear for the right occasion by the right person.
Gear matters if it's mine.
That doesn't mean I have the best or latest, but it's what I need to do my work.