Reading mode: Light Dark

Do these people believe their own BS? "it's not the equipment, it's the photographer!"

Go to last post
A triangle - photographer, equipment and post-processing.

A weakness in any of the these 3 triangle legs may result in less than satisfactory results under specific shooting conditions and needs. Over compensation in any of these 3 legs may not improve an image to result in a significant difference.

Cheers,
Doug

--
Bird galleries on PBase
General photography galleries on PBase
 
Last edited:
Jonathan Brady said:
I don't disagree with your statement about talent vs skill and the photographers here. However I am curious to know which group you believe you belong to.
Click to expand...
You mean, did I just arrogantly talk about rich people being arrogant?

No. I'm just realistic about it.
I think of it like the lottery tickets I will buy like most people when the winning pot gets enormously large. I don't believe that I'll win it, and I don't make plans about what to do with the money.
I just enjoy the dream.

--
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
 
Last edited:
Doug J said:
A triangle - photographer, equipment and post-processing.

A weakness in any of the these 3 triangle legs may result in less than satisfactory results under specific shooting conditions and needs. Over compensation in any of these 3 legs may not improve an image to result in a significant difference.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I would also separate those aspects into smaller groups:
Photographer - Talent, Skill, Dedication.
Equipment - Technology, Familiarity.
Post-Processing - Purist, Artist, Blunderer.
-

Photographer - Talent: Born with an artist's eye.
Photographer - Skill: Takes the time to learn.
Photographer - Dedication: Up at the crack of dawn.

Equipment - Technology: Gearhead.
Equipment - Familiarity: Can work that camera blind-folded and one-handed.

Post-Processing - Purist: Most people.
Post-Processing - Artist: Retouching Forum. A few of those people are magical.
Post-Processing - Blunderer: Just has a lucky knack of randomly found tools for workflow.

-

Gear is just a small part of the equation. It's an important part; but honestly I've seen people who create better photography with a cardboard box camera than they can with $30,000 of the latest, greatest.

One of my favorite photographers of all is a guy who used a Canon Rebel. His work makes me feel like a child, and I look to him like he's my dad who knows so much more than I do that I might never catch up. A Canon Rebel! He probably bought it used...

--
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
 
Last edited:
Jonathan Brady said:
If you've been on DPR's forums for longer than a few days, you've likely seen SOMEONE say this at some time, about something.

What I want to know is, are the people saying it truly bought into it, are they misunderstanding the situations they're talking about, or is there just this big inside joke that I haven't figured out yet? ...diving into it...

Are they bought into it?... Seriously? Do they honestly believe what they're saying, that gear doesn't matter? Really? If so, is it safe to assume that they shoot ONLY with the most mediocre gear they can find?

Are they misunderstanding things?... What I mean by that is, generally, a person asks "what's better, A or B?" And then the responses come in saying things like "the photographer matters more". Well... NO SH**!!! Gear can't take a picture by itself with ZERO human involvement (conversely, a person can't take a photograph without a camera and lens). Just like a gun can't go out, hunt someone down, and kill them, all by itself. But it SEEMS like their interpretation of "what's better, A or B?" is actually "what's better, photographer A with gear A or photographer B with gear B". They don't seem to grasp the fact that THE SAME PERSON would theoretically be using either A OR B and that ONE person wants to know what the better option for them is. How does THAT not register in their head?

Finally, is there some inside joke that I simply haven't been around long enough to get? If so, PLEASE someone fill me... and also, PLEASE let it be truly funny and entertaining!

"It's not the gear, it's the photographer" is the most obvious statement in the world. OF COURSE the photographer matters the most!!! But it's also the most irrelevant statement in the world when 1 person is comparing different options (which is what gear site participants do). However, it's COMPLETELY relevant if we're comparing photographer A to photographer B.

I wonder if DPR would be so kind as to automatically ban anyone making this most obvious, yet completely irrelevant statement on their site? ;-) lol
Click to expand...
 
There is absolutely no substitute for skill. You just can't become a better photographer by buying a better camera or lens. You can gain better capabilities, but better gear just won't make great photos.

And the reverse is true too.

When equipment is equal, then skill will decide. Give two photographers the exact same gear, subject, lighting and conditions, and the better photographer will take a better photo.

The saying "it's not the gear, it's the photographer" is true... but has become a cliche. And no one likes hearing a cliche over and over again.

The suggestion that time and effort spent to improve skill is a better investment than buying better gear is ALSO true. But no one likes hearing it, because they are itching to buy something new.
 
Yes Jonathon, I agree. I have bad GAS and especially the last two years I have gone crazy on purchasing lighting equipment and lenses. I am slowly switching from Canon FF DSLR to Fuji (but not completely) and I think my photography has improved along with it. Maybe that is just a matter of level of interest, but the right lenses help. I remember one time a couple of years ago on a big trip abroad all I had was a the Fuji XT-1 and one zoom (18-55) and it almost killed me not having a couple of fast (wide and normal) primes and a long zoom. I was severely limited (in my mind). That was a mistake made because I was switching to Fuji for travel and didn't buy enough lenses at first for that system. Big mistake.

I agree with you. But this is a camera forum (the best camera board there is). People are always going to say it is all about the art, and that their best work was when they walked around all week with one normal FOV prime. I don't get it. But I have GAS. Life is too short to not buy great gear. My one wish in life is that I had spent more money on good lenses in my 20s and 30s. I'm 59 now, and I understand the importance of it. I know ... its not about the gear - it's the person behind the gear. Its not about the camera, its about the art. It's not about equipment, its about the love for the craft. Its all about the final image, not about the gear that captured it. It's not the camera - it's the photographer. Blah blah blah. I know. I got it.

But what is really important is the gear! I've got GAS bad, but I can of course afford to have GAS more now than when I was a younger.

See my mediocre work on Flickr. GregoryL.Johnson56 (that is dot Johnson) or just search Greg Johnson and pick the baby face logo among the many Greg Johnsons. There are too many Greg Johnsons. This Greg Johnson is about to buy some more lenses! And yes, it will make my photography better.
 
Last edited:
Marty4650 said:
There is absolutely no substitute for skill. You just can't become a better photographer by buying a better camera or lens. You can gain better capabilities, but better gear just won't make great photos.

And the reverse is true too.

When equipment is equal, then skill will decide. Give two photographers the exact same gear, subject, lighting and conditions, and the better photographer will take a better photo.

The saying "it's not the gear, it's the photographer" is true... but has become a cliche. And no one likes hearing a cliche over and over again.

The suggestion that time and effort spent to improve skill is a better investment than buying better gear is ALSO true. But no one likes hearing it, because they are itching to buy something new.

--
Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
I would differ slightly - in such a comparison, skill will be the deciding factor, and if that is even, then dumb luck is likely to have more of an influence on who produces the best shot rather than quality of gear...
 
Last edited:
that a very well renown and some consider one of the greatest photographers of all time, say Ansel Adams, who most of the time used 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras was asked to take an action sports shot with that equipment, what percentage of success would he get?
 
Jonathan Brady said:
If you've been on DPR's forums for longer than a few days, you've likely seen SOMEONE say this at some time, about something.

What I want to know is, are the people saying it truly bought into it, are they misunderstanding the situations they're talking about, or is there just this big inside joke that I haven't figured out yet? ...diving into it...

Are they bought into it?... Seriously? Do they honestly believe what they're saying, that gear doesn't matter? Really? If so, is it safe to assume that they shoot ONLY with the most mediocre gear they can find?
Click to expand...
There is actually some truth to this as long as the equipment you use is good enough for the task at hand. I don't think they mean it doesn't matter at all, that you can get great results with any type of photography with a cell phone.

I see too many people with mediocre skills trying to improve their photography by investing in better equipment yet getting the same results. They think that if they buy that expensive FF camera all of a sudden they will be a good photographer. There are many photos taken by skilled photographers years ago with a Digital Rebel that are better than ones taken today by the latest high end FF camera in the hands of a hack.

Good equipment in the hands of a skilled photographer give the best results.

--
Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.
 
Last edited:
CharlesB58 said:
You must be reading different threads than I do (probably because I avoid threads that are primarily intended to bash on brand while exalting another). Most of the time, in the threads I read, the quoted line is used to respond to people who either:

Believe the poor technical quality of their photos is entirely the fault of their gear.

Or

Think that buying "better gear" will compensate for lack of knowledge of photography fundamentals.

The people who use this phrase to imply that gear is immaterial to the quality of photos aren't worth my time dealing with. In my own case, as a working photographer I knew upgrading from 6 year old Olympus dslrs to the EM1 would make for big improvements in the quality of my photos, just as I knew that upgrading from kit lenses to HG glass would.

Often though, it's not that the anti-gear seeming people have mediocre gear. It can be the opposite: they have expensive gear of a preferred brand and don't like any implication that another brand is better, or even equal to theirs.

Just consider that some people purchase thousands of dollars of high end gear and all they post are photos of their cats. ;-)
Click to expand...
I couldn't have said it any better.
 
techjedi said:
techjedi said:
Another EASY example... A person has a slow zoom and wants to take pictures indoors in dimly lit situations. They don't have supplemental lighting or fast aperture lenses. They need one or both. Simple as that. They're not going to get acceptable results without the right gear. Again, THIS type of situation occurs all the time.
Click to expand...
This is what I would call a demanding situation and most of the lenses that solve this problem are expensive. That said, I have never seen a forum post here on DPR where this scenario was asked and the fast zoom lens wasn't recommended to solve the problem.
Click to expand...
In those situations the problem can be usually solved with skillful use of a good flash. Often in low light a flash can produce better results with a slow zoom than an expensive fast zoom without flash (as long as a flash is allowed, which is usually the case). I believe that most people who frown on flash photography simply don't have the skills to do it properly. For example, in every wedding I have attended the photographer uses flash.

--
Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.
 
Last edited:
Marty4650 said:
There is absolutely no substitute for skill. You just can't become a better photographer by buying a better camera or lens. You can gain better capabilities, but better gear just won't make great photos.

And the reverse is true too.

When equipment is equal, then skill will decide. Give two photographers the exact same gear, subject, lighting and conditions, and the better photographer will take a better photo.

The saying "it's not the gear, it's the photographer" is true... but has become a cliche. And no one likes hearing a cliche over and over again.

The suggestion that time and effort spent to improve skill is a better investment than buying better gear is ALSO true. But no one likes hearing it, because they are itching to buy something new.
Click to expand...
Part of the reason is that the gulf between average consumer gear and high end gear isn't than great any more. For all but the most demanding situations a $700 DSLR will produce results 99% as good as a $4000 DSLR as long as the photographer has the necessary skills.
 
You make a really good point Bob. I suppose I should have said "when all other things are equal" then the better photographer gets the better results.

There are really only two reasons to buy better gear:
  1. You need it, due to some limitation of your existing gear, or
  2. You simply want it, for any other reason, and can afford to buy it
Either reason is valid.

You don't need a good reason to buy anything. Our global economy would collapse if we just bought things that we absolutely needed. I would guess that around 90% of the things I own, I don't really need. I just like having them.

In the strictest sense, I need food, clothing and shelter. I don't need three digital cameras and eleven lenses!

I don't need any of it. But I like having it. :-)
 
Richy6771 said:
that a very well renown and some consider one of the greatest photographers of all time, say Ansel Adams, who most of the time used 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras was asked to take an action sports shot with that equipment, what percentage of success would he get?
Click to expand...
He would be very successful because being the skilled photographer he was he would use equipment suitable for the task. If he was told to use his view cameras he would refuse. I understand your point though. Right tool for the job. You don't use a 10" pipe wrench on a 2" fitting.

--
Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.
 
Last edited:
tbcass said:
Marty4650 said:
There is absolutely no substitute for skill. You just can't become a better photographer by buying a better camera or lens. You can gain better capabilities, but better gear just won't make great photos.

And the reverse is true too.

When equipment is equal, then skill will decide. Give two photographers the exact same gear, subject, lighting and conditions, and the better photographer will take a better photo.

The saying "it's not the gear, it's the photographer" is true... but has become a cliche. And no one likes hearing a cliche over and over again.

The suggestion that time and effort spent to improve skill is a better investment than buying better gear is ALSO true. But no one likes hearing it, because they are itching to buy something new.
Click to expand...
Part of the reason is that the gulf between average consumer gear and high end gear isn't than great any more. For all but the most demanding situations a $700 DSLR will produce results 99% as good as a $4000 DSLR as long as the photographer has the necessary skills.
Click to expand...
And that is because professionals have needs beyond "image quality."

They need durability, reliability, customer support, and in some cases weather sealing. And they might need performance at the extreme edges of existing technology.

You pay a lot for that extra 1% of image quality, if that is all you are after.

But there are some other things that come with that high priced professional gear that the pros need, and I don't need.

--
Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
 
Last edited:
Richy6771 said:
that a very well renown and some consider one of the greatest photographers of all time, say Ansel Adams, who most of the time used 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras was asked to take an action sports shot with that equipment, what percentage of success would he get?
Click to expand...
I like your example because it reveals how utterly terrible most sports photographers really are.

The only way THEY can get the shot is when they have a machine gun to do it for them.

How can you miss when you're practically shooting video?

You might as well have a robot move the camera for you too. Just sit at home and use a remote from your couch and never leave the house.

I think Ansel Adams would still show up sports photographers because his artistry was in post-processing as well. One of more famous quotes from him is about how other photographers take a picture and he views photography as an entire artistic process of not just taking a picture but also making a photograph.

Anyway, you're really reaching.

Suppose, just suppose, Ansel Adams lived in the year 2192 and had a bionic eye camera. Come on!

--
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
 
Last edited:
Richy6771 said:
that a very well renown and some consider one of the greatest photographers of all time, say Ansel Adams, who most of the time used 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras was asked to take an action sports shot with that equipment, what percentage of success would he get?
Click to expand...
I expect Adams would, if put in that scenario, walk away in disgust that anyone would invent such a retarded scenario.

Having said that, Weegee took some remarkably good sports photos with a Speed Graphic.
 
Last edited:
Marty4650 said:
Marty4650 said:
Part of the reason is that the gulf between average consumer gear and high end gear isn't than great any more. For all but the most demanding situations a $700 DSLR will produce results 99% as good as a $4000 DSLR as long as the photographer has the necessary skills.
Click to expand...
And that is because professionals have needs beyond "image quality."

They need durability, reliability, customer support, and in some cases weather sealing. And they might need performance at the extreme edges of existing technology.

You pay a lot for that extra 1% of image quality, if that is all you are after.

But there are some other things that come with that high priced professional gear that the pros need, and I don't need.
Click to expand...
All that is true and high burst rates and advanced AF fit in there as well but that is for a different discussion.
 
I kind of agree with the OP. One doesn't need to be a professional racer to enjoy a Ferrari. And at the end of the day, for non pros, isn't that what it's all about? I could probably get by with APS-C, but why? FF just makes things that much easier and more enjoyable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Night Pixel
Does Gear Matter? Why Professional Photographers Use CHEAP Cameras
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
5K
RubenJ
R
Mathew Anderson
  • Sticky
QotW What's the most memorable photograph you've created?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
291K
tranceliner
T
I
Pixel peeping addiction recovery help.
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Aizuri
A
Mathew Anderson
  • Sticky
  • Featured
Announcement Welcome to the new forum system!
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
737K
BernhardF
BernhardF
B
Cinematographer, videographer - what do I need?
Replies
7
Views
311
Bill Ferris
Bill Ferris

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top