About: Personal wealth and photography

Photography can be very expensive, but it doesn't have to be. There's plenty of very good used gear, and people can (and do) make great photos with old DSLR bodies and one or two lenses. Or with the phones.

If I look on photo sharing sites most photos aren't taken with an A1 or Z9 or R3. Most aren't taken with $3000+ lenses.

More likely is that an explosion of expensive gear - reviewed in detail by gear-oriented sites like DPReview - hasmade sites like DPReview magnets for people who love expensive gear.
 
So has this become a rich-lister sport?
No. Of course it's possible to spend a fortune on this (as it is with anything else), but plenty of nice photo gear is available that will fit comfortably into ordinary working class budgets.
Working class budgets in which country ? And how about retired working class people living on state pensions ?
So it comes down to establishing specific definitions (the favorite topic of Open Talk). If that's how we need to proceed, then define rich, define working class, and define inadequate income. Then, when all the definitions are agreed upon, the discussion can continue.

Or simply acknowledge that decent photographic tools are not limited to the 'rich-listers', whoever they are. To save everyone a lot of time, I'll just revise my statement like this:

No. Of course it's possible to spend a fortune on this (as it is with anything else), but plenty of nice photo gear is available that will fit comfortably into many ordinary working class budgets.

Or like this:

No. Of course it's possible to spend a fortune on this (as it is with anything else), but it's not necessary in order to have nice photo gear.

I assume you get the idea now.
But, shouldn't you also have to define "a fortune" and even "comfortably"? :-)
I was thinking of countries like Zimbabwe, where many people have difficulty buying food, let alone cameras. Even in the USA there are some who go hungry.


Don
 
So has this become a rich-lister sport?
No. Of course it's possible to spend a fortune on this (as it is with anything else), but plenty of nice photo gear is available that will fit comfortably into ordinary working class budgets.
Working class budgets in which country ? And how about retired working class people living on state pensions ?
So it comes down to establishing specific definitions (the favorite topic of Open Talk). If that's how we need to proceed, then define rich, define working class, and define inadequate income. Then, when all the definitions are agreed upon, the discussion can continue.

Or simply acknowledge that decent photographic tools are not limited to the 'rich-listers', whoever they are. To save everyone a lot of time, I'll just revise my statement like this:

No. Of course it's possible to spend a fortune on this (as it is with anything else), but plenty of nice photo gear is available that will fit comfortably into many ordinary working class budgets.

Or like this:

No. Of course it's possible to spend a fortune on this (as it is with anything else), but it's not necessary in order to have nice photo gear.

I assume you get the idea now.
But, shouldn't you also have to define "a fortune" and even "comfortably"? :-)
I was thinking of countries like Zimbabwe, where many people have difficulty buying food, let alone cameras. Even in the USA there are some who go hungry.

https://moveforhunger.org/

Don
Sadly inequality in life is not restricted to any one country. I agree certain countries are intrinsically poorer. We cannot level the living standards worldwide, we have to make our own path, help others when possible. L
 
I have absolutely no idea what a high or a low income is, and don't really care. No idea either about what proportion of money other people spend on cameras.

Whilst having good tools is obviously important (I think we can all agree on that), I do have other, higher priority goals, which require a lot more money. Goals related to property, business and work choices, location, etc. As such, I make sure photography expenditure is in the vague bracket of 'pocket money', not serious money.

I'd add that cars, watches, holidays etc should also be using small amounts of money, at least until one is fully satisfied with their property, work/business goals, etc.

I'd suggest anyone about to buy the latest camera really ask themselves if they'd be better off investing the same money, and how they could use the proceeds in 10 or 20 years time.
 
I have absolutely no idea what a high or a low income is, and don't really care. No idea either about what proportion of money other people spend on cameras.

Whilst having good tools is obviously important (I think we can all agree on that), I do have other, higher priority goals, which require a lot more money. Goals related to property, business and work choices, location, etc. As such, I make sure photography expenditure is in the vague bracket of 'pocket money', not serious money.

I'd add that cars, watches, holidays etc should also be using small amounts of money, at least until one is fully satisfied with their property, work/business goals, etc.

I'd suggest anyone about to buy the latest camera really ask themselves if they'd be better off investing the same money, and how they could use the proceeds in 10 or 20 years time.
Great idea, but not everyone can understand or appreciate that level of advice. L
 
I'd suggest anyone about to buy the latest camera really ask themselves if they'd be better off investing the same money, and how they could use the proceeds in 10 or 20 years time.
I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume that someone looking at the latest camera hasn't done that already.
 
You might find that, unless you post some pics, that an M2 user has little relevance on a gear-and-spend forum after sharing your discovery regarding simplification wears off.

Like sharing the virtues of a D70 over a Z7II (1/500s flash sync, in case you forgot/never knew) where you can't share this more than once.

I would always open your posts for the photos, but don't think that's the norm, in particular on exotica threads like Dr Ulrich Rohde tri-something where your M2 plus prime doesn't have much relevance.

MFD is what keeps me away from older gear, just found an interesting 135/2.8 classic lens. MFD 10 ft or 3 metres ...

I find, back to the topic, that relevance within these fora has a minimum height requirement, nobody below 5" on the roller-coaster...
True, true! But replace my M2 with whatever basic kit anyone might have had say five years ago. Like an X-T3 with the 18 f/2 and 35 f/1.4. What I'm trying to say is just that it doesn't have to be a "rich-lister sport"—it's just that this version of the hobby, as practiced on / through a forum like DPR, ends up being a money-pit. We say that we're just trying to please ourselves, but what's really happening is that we're trying to please The Forum, which has got into our heads.

I often feel like the internet has brought Too Much Information (TMI) to my hobby. I'd be happiest if I could just freeze my level of knowledge right now. Never learn anything new about how the gear could be better or different. Just be happy with what I have. The problem is that it's hard to unknow what you know.....
 
You might find that, unless you post some pics, that an M2 user has little relevance on a gear-and-spend forum after sharing your discovery regarding simplification wears off.

Like sharing the virtues of a D70 over a Z7II (1/500s flash sync, in case you forgot/never knew) where you can't share this more than once.

I would always open your posts for the photos, but don't think that's the norm, in particular on exotica threads like Dr Ulrich Rohde tri-something where your M2 plus prime doesn't have much relevance.

MFD is what keeps me away from older gear, just found an interesting 135/2.8 classic lens. MFD 10 ft or 3 metres ...

I find, back to the topic, that relevance within these fora has a minimum height requirement, nobody below 5" on the roller-coaster...
True, true! But replace my M2 with whatever basic kit anyone might have had say five years ago. Like an X-T3 with the 18 f/2 and 35 f/1.4. What I'm trying to say is just that it doesn't have to be a "rich-lister sport"—it's just that this version of the hobby, as practiced on / through a forum like DPR, ends up being a money-pit. We say that we're just trying to please ourselves, but what's really happening is that we're trying to please The Forum, which has got into our heads.

I often feel like the internet has brought Too Much Information (TMI) to my hobby. I'd be happiest if I could just freeze my level of knowledge right now. Never learn anything new about how the gear could be better or different. Just be happy with what I have. The problem is that it's hard to unknow what you know.....
But, you have your equipment and presumably it satisfies you, just sign out, and get on with your photography. You may even find you become a happier person. L
 
But, you have your equipment and presumably it satisfies you, just sign out, and get on with your photography. You may even find you become a happier person. L
Yes, and this is my point, re: deed's original question. A forum like this isn't a place where people who are satisfied with their gear have a lot to contribute—and so the forum is populated with people who are still on the hunt, and an illusion is created in which all photographers appear to be gear-hungry. But that's not true. It's just that those who aren't gear hungry end up having too little to say.
 
I'd suggest anyone about to buy the latest camera really ask themselves if they'd be better off investing the same money, and how they could use the proceeds in 10 or 20 years time.
Considering my age and of many of the posters here on DPR, many of us won't be around in 10-20 years. I will say that I was able to buy all the toys I wanted throughout my life and still retire very comfortably. Living a spartan existence wasn't my idea of happiness.

--
Tom
 
But, you have your equipment and presumably it satisfies you, just sign out, and get on with your photography. You may even find you become a happier person. L
Yes, and this is my point, re: deed's original question. A forum like this isn't a place where people who are satisfied with their gear have a lot to contribute—and so the forum is populated with people who are still on the hunt, and an illusion is created in which all photographers appear to be gear-hungry. But that's not true. It's just that those who aren't gear hungry end up having too little to say.
I hear you, but the Forum is really a vehicle to encourage buying New equipment. Everything else is window dressing. Let’s face it, the camera manufacturers love the digital market, it’s a never ending wide spectrum sales opportunity. Many photographers climb the never ending staircase to the bigger, better & latest whizz bang mega pixel electronic boxes..L
 
I think there are two separate hobbies involved. "Taking photos" and "Buying the latest gear." And this website tends to lean heavily on the later hobby. After all, this is a camera review site, designed to help you select your next new camera.

"Taking photos" is alive and well, thanks to the smartphone. It has become the imaging device of choice for the masses for taking snapshots, vacation photos, and holiday photos. The smartphone has effectively replaced all cameras except those at the very high end.

The high end market is still there, but it is much smaller than it once was, because those new cameras are so expensive that this market is limited to professionals and well heeled high end enthusiasts. And a lot of amateurs were buying them in the past, because it was stylish to show up with a DSLR, and smartphones weren't invented yet.

When I say they have gotten very expensive, I am not exaggerating. So far this year only ten cameras were announced according to the DPR Camera Timeline. And nine of them were MILC cameras and one was a Rangefinder ILC. There were absolutely no compact cameras, rugged cameras, superzooms, travel zooms, or anything for people of modest means. And the average list price for these ten cameras was around $3,400.

But to be fair, they don't make those cameras anymore because not very many people would buy them. They have smartphones now, that seem to take perfectly good photos. At least for their needs.

53f1c1581e1a4865a7e647c66a564730.jpg

Obviously, if people would BUY cheaper cameras, someone would make them. But they aren't buying them because their smartphones are good enough for their needs. So the industry has no other option than to move up market and cater to those with deeper pockets.

Now at this point someone will say "inflation makes these new cameras so expensive" or "you don't have to spend a lot if you buy one Nikon Z30 and one lens."

And I say, yes inflation has driven up prices, but not that much as those MSRPs seem to indicate. The manufacturers have clearly abandoned the entry level and intermediate market because they had no other choice.

And while that Z30 is certainly a nice camera, and you can still take photos with one lens, people like want multiple cameras and multiple lenses. And there aren't many people like me around today. I consider myself an "advanced amateur" and I have a fairly modest M4/3 kit, because I am not wealthy. But even at that, I have spent over $10,000 on various cameras and lenses BEFORE the current wave of inflation set in. And my newest camera is six years old!

Buying the latest cameras is no longer a poor man's hobby. So the folks you see here are people just like you and me. Those who can afford things they really don't need.

DPR started out 24 years ago helping advise the mass market what to buy next. Today, their audience has been reduced to high end users, professionals, and people who also collect Rolex and Omega wrist watches.

--
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:
When I say they have gotten very expensive, I am not exaggerating. So far this year only ten cameras were announced according to the DPR Camera Timeline. And nine of them were MILC cameras and one was a Rangefinder ILC. There were absolutely no compact cameras, rugged cameras, superzooms, travel zooms, or anything for people of modest means. And the average list price for these ten cameras was around $3,400.

But to be fair, they don't make those cameras anymore because not very many people would buy them. They have smartphones now, that seem to take perfectly good photos. At least for their needs.

53f1c1581e1a4865a7e647c66a564730.jpg
The Leica and Hasselblad have a very strong effect on the result in this case though; their combined price is more than the sum of the other eight camera's price, with a very large gap between them and the next most expensive camera(s). Median ($2349) might be a better metric for this kind of distribution with some outliers.
 
Last edited:
I know plenty of people who don't have much expendable income who have managed to spend thousands on their hobbies - they own ATVs or boats or campers or woodworking tools or nicer cars than they need or whatever. People find a way to spend some extra money on whatever matters most to them.

- Dennis
--
That would be us. We have never been vacationers. Three years ago, we decided to buy a camper. After traveling for a year around our state, we decided to go seasonal. We are in the same place from mid May til Columbus Day in October. We met our best friends there and we say it’s our “summer estate”. It’s about the only thing we’ve done for ourselves as a couple. Best thing we’ve ever done.

Marie
 
I think there are two separate hobbies involved. "Taking photos" and "Buying the latest gear." And this website tends to lean heavily on the later hobby. After all, this is a camera review site, designed to help you select your next new camera.

"Taking photos" is alive and well, thanks to the smartphone. It has become the imaging device of choice for the masses for taking snapshots, vacation photos, and holiday photos. The smartphone has effectively replaced all cameras except those at the very high end.

The high end market is still there, but it is much smaller than it once was, because those new cameras are so expensive that this market is limited to professionals and well heeled high end enthusiasts. And a lot of amateurs were buying them in the past, because it was stylish to show up with a DSLR, and smartphones weren't invented yet.

When I say they have gotten very expensive, I am not exaggerating. So far this year only ten cameras were announced according to the DPR Camera Timeline. And nine of them were MILC cameras and one was a Rangefinder ILC. There were absolutely no compact cameras, rugged cameras, superzooms, travel zooms, or anything for people of modest means. And the average list price for these ten cameras was around $3,400.

But to be fair, they don't make those cameras anymore because not very many people would buy them. They have smartphones now, that seem to take perfectly good photos. At least for their needs.

53f1c1581e1a4865a7e647c66a564730.jpg

Obviously, if people would BUY cheaper cameras, someone would make them. But they aren't buying them because their smartphones are good enough for their needs. So the industry has no other option than to move up market and cater to those with deeper pockets.

Now at this point someone will say "inflation makes these new cameras so expensive" or "you don't have to spend a lot if you buy one Nikon Z30 and one lens."

And I say, yes inflation has driven up prices, but not that much as those MSRPs seem to indicate. The manufacturers have clearly abandoned the entry level and intermediate market because they had no other choice.

And while that Z30 is certainly a nice camera, and you can still take photos with one lens, people like want multiple cameras and multiple lenses. And there aren't many people like me around today. I consider myself an "advanced amateur" and I have a fairly modest M4/3 kit, because I am not wealthy. But even at that, I have spent over $10,000 on various cameras and lenses BEFORE the current wave of inflation set in. And my newest camera is six years old!

Buying the latest cameras is no longer a poor man's hobby. So the folks you see here are people just like you and me. Those who can afford things they really don't need.

DPR started out 24 years ago helping advise the mass market what to buy next. Today, their audience has been reduced to high end users, professionals, and people who also collect Rolex and Omega wrist watches.
Really good post and distinction. I'd almost argue that if you don't care about having the latest and greatest and just want decent gear to further your photography it has probably never been cheaper to do so.

I remember when I first shot a 5D Mk1 probably 13 or so years ago. It was like driving a Mercedes for the first time. Now you can grab one for $500 all day. And it's still a great camera.

I think people that get heartburn over high camera prices probably spend too much time looking at the latest and greatest rather than focusing on their photography or looking at the broader market. As far as capability per dollar cameras have never been cheaper. If you don't need video or the latest and greatest cameras are very cheap

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/
 
That would be us. We have never been vacationers. Three years ago, we decided to buy a camper. After traveling for a year around our state, we decided to go seasonal. We are in the same place from mid May til Columbus Day in October. We met our best friends there and we say it’s our “summer estate”. It’s about the only thing we’ve done for ourselves as a couple. Best thing we’ve ever done.
That's very cool! May you enjoy many happy summers at your new estate :)

- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
 
I think there are two separate hobbies involved. "Taking photos" and "Buying the latest gear." And this website tends to lean heavily on the later hobby. After all, this is a camera review site, designed to help you select your next new camera.
This is a very good point and observation.

There is definitely pride and satisfaction in owning and using highly regarding equipment. You could also differentiate what people do with their equipment. Casual snap shots, enthusiasts, professionals, etc..

It is interesting that many accomplished professionals think of their gear purely as tools, their gear is kind of old and their photos are 10x better than the enthusiast using the latest and greatest gear.
 
But, you have your equipment and presumably it satisfies you, just sign out, and get on with your photography. You may even find you become a happier person. L
Yes, and this is my point, re: deed's original question. A forum like this isn't a place where people who are satisfied with their gear have a lot to contribute—and so the forum is populated with people who are still on the hunt, and an illusion is created in which all photographers appear to be gear-hungry. But that's not true. It's just that those who aren't gear hungry end up having too little to say.
I don't know about that. I see posts from a lot of people who are completely satisfied with their gear and want advice. There are also a lot of posts making fun of people who are looking for new gear all the time and refer to people on the hunt as "gearheads".
 
I often notice how personally well off a lot of people seem to be within the dpreview fora.

Macbook Pro, iPhone 14 extra-large or - just recently - RAID systems with 12TB SSDs. A few Leicas, "should I get another A1- or should I get an A7IV" instead?

The new Fuji greeted with specification debates rather than a question as to where this is going. Price-wise.

So has this become a rich-lister sport?

I mean, surely you can get an A6000 or X-E3, Panasonic GX8/9? But maybe it is a bit too intimidating being around people who can afford a few A1s, Q2M plus a couple of M11s??

So what's going on?

Deed
When people brag about the expensive equipment they own or have an extensive/expensive gear list posted on their profile, I sometimes wonder if maybe, just maybe, they're stretching the truth a bit.

I also wonder if some of the people, who are being truthful, have credit card debt that might be embarrassing.

Naturally, there are some very well off people, on these forums, but I think most of those people keep a pretty low profile.

The last expensive camera I bought was purchased 10-years ago, and I still have that camera, and although my phone is an iPhone, it's an iPhone7.

We aren't rich, but lucky enough to not have money worries and have always considered ourselves average. I've, also, always thought a Dell computer was just as good as an Apple. :-):-)
How utterly controversial. A couple of weeks ago there was this thread on the Fuji forum regarding compressed files where I dared to mention that I thought it was a good idea. I almost lost my passport over the flak I got where it appeared that EVERYONE - except me - had RAID controllers, iPhones and Macbooks, a few 12TB SSDs, so cheap at around US$ a pop.
:-) I'm not even sure what I'd do with RAID controllers, and I'd be afraid to put "all my eggs in one basket" with a 12TB SSD. Naturally, everything would be backed up on another drive, but 12TB is getting a little carried away.


I don't store a lot on my low-end ( :-) ) Dell, and although it does have a SSD the size is nothing to brag about.
DELL? An insult, don't they sell inferior gear at KMART?
Well, we don't have a KMart, so I had to order mine from the Dell website. We do have a couple of Walmart stores, and I think they sell some of the inexpensive Dell laptops, so I might check them out when I'm ready for something new.
And that was on the Fuji forum. Not on the "should I get a third A1 for Galapagos?" Sony forum.

And I am far from guilt free in all this. But believe it's all gone a bit bonkers on certain gear fora.
When I first switched from film to digital, I bought a brand new 6mp Canon 10D that cost $1500.00 at the time. That was a lot of money, back then, but I already had several Canon EF lenses and did get a lot of use out of that camera before "upgrading" to a newer Canon model that was actually less expensive (they went down slightly in price).

The next expensive camera I bought was the Sony RX1, when it was introduced, and I still have that camera.

I've occasionally bought less expensive new gear, over the years, but most of the time I'll look on the Fred Miranda buy/sell forum or at a place like KEH when I want something.
 
Last edited:
But, you have your equipment and presumably it satisfies you, just sign out, and get on with your photography. You may even find you become a happier person. L
Yes, and this is my point, re: deed's original question. A forum like this isn't a place where people who are satisfied with their gear have a lot to contribute—and so the forum is populated with people who are still on the hunt, and an illusion is created in which all photographers appear to be gear-hungry. But that's not true. It's just that those who aren't gear hungry end up having too little to say.
I don't know about that. I see posts from a lot of people who are completely satisfied with their gear and want advice. There are also a lot of posts making fun of people who are looking for new gear all the time and refer to people on the hunt as "gearheads".
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top