Quite frankly, neither should you. I understand that we all love our gear and we all have dreams of upgrading and moving on to bigger and better things, but that's not the real point of it all, not really.
Don't get me wrong, there's nothing quite like unboxing a new piece of equipment and getting to use it for the very first time. That is a feeling that just never gets old. In fact, I dare say that it's probably one of the most invigorating experiences that a photographer can have. All the excitement and creativity just waiting to be channeled through that brand new camera is always something potent. However, by this point in my career, I have talked with enough photographers who spend more time than they should worrying about the gear they have and the gear they'd like to have. No, I'm not exempt from this either. I read about what gear is available now compared to what I actually own, or I'll read about what's coming out and try to scheme how I can ditch my current setup and move on to the new and shinier pieces of equipment. I found myself in this sort of mental predicament not even a year ago, and what really helped my change my frame of mind came from something one of our editors here at Fstoppers told me.
I had been, in essence, complaining about the fact that my newer-model camera had died and that I had to fall back on an older piece of gear in order to continue shooting. I was asking for advice from other Fstoppers writers about their thoughts between two different cameras I was interested in buying. Instead of giving me an opinion between the two cameras, the editor simply stated that he couldn't see any problems with my current work (with a 10-year old camera) and suggested that I keep doing what I was doing until I absolutely needed a new camera. It was eye opening, honestly. He was right, I didn't need a new camera; I just wanted one, really.
It was a solid reality check for me to be brought back to reality and realize that it really is all about the person wielding the equipment and not about the gear itself. Are there things I wish I could do with my current camera, that I just simply can't, because it's outside the capabilities of the camera itself? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean I have to just up and buy a new camera. Sure, there's the whole conversation about budgeting and making a smart purchase, but that's not the only thing worth considering. The reality that I was brought back to was this: my current camera works just fine, I'm still able to create images of which I am very proud, and the same people that share the artwork with me (as my audience) appreciates it all the same.
I understand this may all just sound like something someone would say when they simply can't afford a new camera. In the past, you'd probably be right. But honestly, I could go buy a better camera today if I really wanted to. But I really don't need to. When the situation arises where I actually have a legitimate need for a different piece of gear, you better believe I'm going to buy it and love every minute of it. But I really am taking the dose of humility for what it's worth by continuing to see just how good my work can be while shooting with a very old camera. So far, it's an adventure that's paying out quite nicely. I still get to capture what I want to capture, my images still look every bit how I want them to look, and I get to put myself to the test every time I play with a camera that has served me well for years upon years.
Take it for what it's worth; your camera does not define you. You alone get to decide exactly how creative, how dedicated, and how productive you want to be with your own photography. Regardless of what you actually hold in your hands for creating something you intend to share with others, enjoy the fact that you are there, creating, doing what you love.
I use a black camera because black cameras are the best. Unless you have a silver camera. Then silver is the best.
wait until you see a red camera
https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D5500-Digital-DX-format-Red/dp/B00THIVF4G
Best camera ever?
"...by continuing to see just how good my work can be while shooting with a very old camera."
You're talking about a 10-year old camera, right? One of my main camera is a 87-year old camera and I'm testing a 120-year old camera these days. I guess "very old camera" is a relative notion... :)
Exactly that.
If I weren't a member of DPR, I'd probably agree with you, but there are plenty of people that 'care' about what gear one is using. It takes little poking around there to find mirrorless guys trying to shame we dinosaur DSLR users whenever the opportunity arises.
It goes the other way around, but not nearly as much.
These forums are not generalisable to the broader population.
I've found that many of the forums on DPR can quickly devolve into pedantic technical or gear minutiae to the point that I want to poke them in the eye and tell them to go take a freaking picture.
But, at the end of the day, the camera or the software one uses matters far less than simply envisioning something, and creating the image that represents it; no matter what is used or how it's used.
I think it's a shame what DPR has become. I'm so fed up with the juvenile behavior and the tolerance for it that I quit visiting DPR and removed my gallery and gear list.
I like Fstoppers and hope it never devolves into that kind of site / mentality.
DPR is the new PetaPixel.
Not to mention the people who buy big cameras because they want to look the part.
If it's in the budget, doesn't matter why. Heck, if a guy buys a Phase 1 to take pictures of his cat, that's good for Phase 1 and the rest of us to keep Phase 1 in business. ;-)
True enough.
Nor what lens, lighting system, light modifiers, light stands etc.
Be courteous, take the best photos you can take and deliver on time.
Good article. There is one thing which you probably did not consider (maybe because it was not relevant for you if you had a permanent job). You are talking from the photographer’s perspective rather than from perspective of a potential client. In some places, when you get a brief with requirements from a client, they ask “what equipment do you use?”. Unfortunately, if your answer is “10 years old camera” (anything that may not sound as “professional” in the eyes of the client) or similar, there is a high risk you will not be hired. As simple as that. I am not talking about whether the clients are wrong or right, and whether they should be judging by looking at images you create rather than by gear you use. I am talking about perception the clients get and our ability to be competitive.
I would suggest that the average client would not know that a D3 or D700 were 11 years old.
Depends. Some corporate companies do have people who can tell if a camera was discontinued 10 years ago. I would not make an assumption. I was speaking from experience.
I have been shooting for people, magazines, agencies and corporations for more than 30 years. I have had clients discuss what format I would be using but never what brand or model of camera. I guess they trusted me to make that decision.
The closest was when I assisted a car photographer and the client, one of the old timey Detroit big three required everything to be shot with a 14 inch Commercial Ektar. They determined that their cars looked best with that lens.
Again, no reason to argue. As I mentioned, it does happen in "some places" but not the others. It does happen where I live, - most of corporate events briefs I get have a question "What equipment do you use?". If it does not happen to you or in the city where you live, it does not mean that it does not happen somewhere else.
Try this for assumption; the author shoots landscape.
No reason to argue. I spoke from experience of shooting events for corporate clients. Your comment is not applicable, due to difference in requirements and nature of work.
Wait, the author wrote from his professional point of view, you eqivocate, and now it's "your comment is not applicable"?
Run along, child.
I would appreciate if you would think twice before letting yourself to be rude. It is disgusting when people let themselves to be rude online and say things they would not say face to face. "Your comment is not applicable" means that it is not applicable to the type of photography I do. It does not mean that you are not allowed to make any comments. Give yourself time to think before rushing to reply. Hope it would help you to grow up.
We're not all spineless mewling quims, who are terrified to speak truth to peoples' faces.
Run along, child.
Your behaviour has been reported and is not acceptable. You are not my father, I am not your child. Consider taking some time to learn what "respect" stands for before leaving your house. Or consider staying in your house until you grow up.
Did I hurt your delicate feelings? Are you offended? This is a large part of the problem with the modern world, you morons don't care one iota about starving children, or environmental destruction; but your precious feelings...
The fact that you are upset over being called a child would suggest that you are emotionally stunted.
You are pathetic.
Run along child.
You can keep making yourself look like a fool publicly, if you have (clearly) nothing to do and as long as it makes you happy. I do not care. You may need a psychologist who can help you with your irritation towards this world. Hope you would feel better and more positive, and start enjoying your miserable life.
The fact that you are so determined to be offended, and so determined to keep arguing with me over a trivial slight, would support an inference that YOU are the one in need of therapy.
I cannot help but reflect that your photography is decent, yet your rating is 1.9 - you probably act like this on a regular basis.
Run along child.
you shared your anecdote, another shared theirs. to assume someone is trying to discredit your anecdote with one of their own reflects poorly on you and you alone. someone shared their personal experience, like you did, but as it differed from your own you felt threatened, became stand-offish and chose to then discredit their personal experience? that's... immature.
besides, your original contribution being related to the actual post is tenuous at best and, as observed, seems more to serve your own ego rather than to truly enlighten, especially since we both know you haven't said anything that hasn't been said hundreds of times in hundreds of comments sections in hundreds of photography sites. it's pejoratively referred to as a "subtle brag." the author shares a personal anecdote as to their relationship with their current hardware and you felt compelled to inform everyone that you worked with clients who cared about your gear. cool beans.
"no reason to argue as your response will not be applicable." just my observation as a third party.
Could not even read until the end, so boring and it sounds like it was written by a psychologist who did not finish his education. I have no time for meaningless arguments. Before accusing me of my big ego, you may consider using your brain and thinking a bit broader. People advising to use very old cameras may harm your business, as this would help in creating a reputation of a poor photographer who cannot afford investing in proper equipment. I am not trying to promote the idea of buying the newest gear. However, almost every photographer that I saw using very old cameras (more than 10 years old) were the ones who struggle to get clients and jobs. I have heard Clients saying they cannot trust a photographer with a very old camera as they are afraid that it will break down during a shoot. I am talking from experience. My original comment was written with objective of helping people to see the other side of using old equipment. If it was not helpful for you - please move on. If you have time to waste and are looking for someone to start a flight with, please look somewhere else. Have a great day. All the best.
"Psychologist who didn't finish their education"
No such creature. Stop trying to sound like you know what you are talking about.
Hmm layoff man. Yan, only made a point that some clients do care about the gear you use. He is right about that and it should have been left at that. I don't see any ego trip here. The man was just sharing his experience with the topic. That doesn't mean he is stroking his ego. Just let it go.
Generally, if a client is interested in hiring a photographer based on the quality of their work; from a portfolio, perhaps, and professional reputation, what benefit is it that they concern themselves with the equipment used?
I can't speak from the clients' perspective. I can speak from the experience I had.
I see ...
It depends I guess with the creative director/company. I worked for a company that wouldn't work with photographers if they didn't use medium format. Personally I thought it was stupid but that was their policy. Vouge a long time ago would only accept large format for their covers. So did other magazines. No clue what they accept now or if they even care.
In 30 years working as a commercial photographer I can recall maybe three times a client asking me what type of camera I was going to use.
I guess it depends on the client. My wedding film clients almost never ask. Because to them other things matter more. But commercial clients on occasion do. Like last year when the TV channel explicitely asked to shoot with an Arri Alexa.
Shiny! My Autocord is loaded and ready for work...again!
So much this.
I disagree. I spend up to 12 hours per day getting into arguments in online forums about pixel density and is ISO a real thing or not? I just bought a Nikon Z7 but I instantly regretted it because Fuji is coming out with a 100 MP medium format camera. I make $50K a year and spend $19K on equipment, so I can't afford to go anywhere and shoot, but who cares?
You spend 12 hours per day arguing on the internet...
John.... you have a weird life man...
just a joke, kids.
You know that Phase One has a 150 MP camera 😂😱
Two things: 1) If you have a ten-year-old camera to fall back on when your newer camera dies, then you upgraded for no reason. I'm on my third DSLR only because the previous two no longer work. 2) Fstoppers has editors? Look at this sentence and tell me these "editors" are doing anything beyond collecting a paycheck: "It was a solid reality check for me to be brought back to reality and realize that it really is all about the person wielding the equipment and not about the gear itself." Imagine how boring that would have been without the word root "real."
you've confused "editor" with "copy editor." just thought i'd point that out.
no blogger wants to be a "staff writer," they want to be in charge of their posts, hence "editor." basically, in the world of writing, "editor" simply means, "nobody else sets goals for me."
I would disagree with point 1 as it assumes that you would never want two cameras. I shoot ice hockey on a 1DX2 and have a 7D2 as a backup. Can’t justify the cost of a 1DX2 as a backup that will gather dust 95% of the time but also can’t run the risk of getting no photos on the rare occasion that my 1DX2 decides that its not going to play nice that day.
Can I get shots that have value on my 7D2? Absolutely? Is the quality of my work the same when I do? Absolutely not.
Exactly! I use 1DX2 for sports, landscape , events and I use iPhone XS for street and for backup just in case. I'm not a professional and have the ability to purchase anything. Equipment makes getting the shot easier even though many of my shots still end up as crap. Equipment is an enabler but the eye is the creator.