Old Man Yells at Clouds - A Perspective Against New Gear Lust

Hey folks. Nice to be with you again. One the last month or so, I have encountered a number of very genuine questions about the need for new gear. “Is my equipment out of date?”, “My XX is five years old, what should I replace it with?” and the common “will a new XX give me better pictures?”

Very fair questions, aggressively fostered by manufacturers and influencers on YouTube and in magazines and blogs. As a long time educator and longer time photographer, I would offer my thoughts.

Worrying about something being outdated or discontinued is a fool’s errand and can be very expensive. Manufacturers regularly release new products and it is there major hope that you buy them to replace what you already own. They make no money from what you already have and they have a responsibility to generate new income streams. This is tougher because photography has an industry continues to decline in terms of revenue, spend and new adopters. Smartphones with cameras that do extensive computational work do not fall into the photographic industry from a business perspective.

The only time your gear is outdated is when it stops working. That does not mean you may not choose to purchase something newer, but only do so if it brings you new functions that you actually need and will actually use. Depreciation on photo gear is very aggressive and value falls fast before levelling out. Some makers try to maintain value by limiting their output, knowing that scarcity drives prices up. Regardless, new versions of what you have may not actually deliver something that you really will benefit from and use. A new feature is worth nothing in the having, only in the using.

A new version is also not necessarily better. If there is nothing there that will make a difference for you in the immediate term, then the buying is a money suck because there will be yet another version in a short time, typically 12-18 months. Many creatives have bought into the newest hottest only to find it made no difference and there was a newer newest hottest shipping shortly.

The final question always has a single answer and that answer is no. No gear of any kind makes better photographs, because you make the photograph and the equipment are merely tools to facilitate that. I can make the same personally pleasing and high quality images using equipment from the 1950s as with the newest camera that I own. Certainly there are features in the new camera that are convenient, like a light meter, a flash meter and for me as I age, the magic of tilting and rotating rear display. However, the exposure, composition, and story are set by me, not the gear. The older gear may be a bit more work, but the images made with something newer are not by default “better” They never have been and so long as a human is the entity making the image, they never will be. Yes focus might be simpler, there may be greater dynamic range, the device may be quieter or lighter, but the image is created in the brain and no technology replaces the human brain.

Photography is about the human interface not the gear. You may get a machine that can make a million “properly focused and exposed” images but those images will not have the Human Touch. Some folks are successful with smartphone cameras because they bring the human touch, while others contribute to the two billion crappy images shot every day without thought, composition or emotional intent.

We understand that manufacturer’s primary goal has to be generating income. However you may not be aware that social media does not place your best interest anywhere in its set of goals either. Gear is provided to influencers who are paid to follow a script. I have seen it many times where multiple “independent” reviewers products are word for word identical to a press release. There is no actual review taking place, it’s just paid outreach. The magazine business is dead, and only stumbles from issue to issue on its revenue from selling advertising. A bad review in a magazine now results in the termination of advertising revenue. Some makers require oversight of all reviews prior to publication. The number of true independents is incredibly small.

Social media based channels that are not paid influencers depend on income from the hosting organizations. Let’s use YouTube as an example. How often have you been encouraged when watching a YouTube video to click Like and to Subscribe. If you appreciate the content go for it because by increasing and maintaining like counts and subscription levels, YouTube presenters will get paid by YouTube because those channels have broader reach and so the embedded advertising reaches more eyeballs. I pay an annual fee to YouTube to NOT see advertising injection. If I could not do that, I probably would not use YouTube. While I think that most television is written for the stupid and shallow, the fact that ⅓ of every broadcast program is filled with ads is the major reason that I do not watch television. Personally I hate ads. You should do whatever you like.

Which brings to question, what sources can you trust. Independents who are not compensated, who may or may not receive gear for evaluation who never have to clear their reviews in advance. And let’s face it. Most all gear these days is really good., so it’s makers fighting over a diminishing slice of pie.

The Nikon vs Canon vs whatever wars are not real. They are constructed to CREATE division and a sense of “other”, as if gear makes any difference in who you are as a person, because it sure as hell makes no difference in the image, because the image, to be successful, must be tool independent. They prey on the insecure who want to be part of a group, when such membership is not real and brings no value add.

New equipment never makes better photos. Instead of dropping hard earned after tax money on gear, step back and really consider if you are maximizing the use of what you already own. Don’t be embarrassed when you discover that the answer is no. That is a clear indicator that you do not need the expense of new gear. Invest in classes, go on live photo sessions, and if there is a lot of selling in what you see and attend, know that you are in the wrong place. If you ever attend a workshop where the workshop leader is taking pictures, pat yourself on the back for paying for that person’s trip. Bluntly, it’s a scam. A real workshop leader is not taking pictures. He or she is spending time with you to support you in getting the kinds of pictures that you want. And if that teacher or workshop leader tells you that all will be better if you just bought XX, then get your rubber boots on, because you are going to be up to your knees in bullshit.

Thanks for reading. When you do decide to purchase gear, do so through the link on the main page and get it from B&H. They maintain excellent stock, ship internationally, have excellent staff and know their business. My links cost you nothing extra to use and pay me a very small commission for making shopping at B&H easier. Until next time, peace.