Acquiring new gear: Growing as a photographer, or just a "Gearhead"?

[Cletus]

I started to get into this on someone else's post about "Which one lens..." , but I really do think this might be a relevant question - and that I know has been addressed in the past - BUT:

LFF user 'mdm' made mention in that thread about having only the bare minimum of equipment to make a photograph; that the real joy in photography lies, not in the collection of cameras, lenses and kit you have, but in releasing the shutter and seeing your print, still wet under the light for the first time (I'm paraphrasing here)...

I personally, fundamentally, agree with this notion, but I also love my cameras and no matter how much I try to keep my gear acquisitions in check, there seems to always be something else I need. There was a time when I was perfectly satisfied with nothing more than (literally) a Nikon FE2 with a 50/1.4 and just enough darkroom stuff to make a print. I was making the best photos, at that time, then I ever had before and that's after downscaling a HUGE Nikon F100 setup with MANY lenses and other paraphernalia. I didn't think I'd ever need to buy anything else except materials, ever.

Then one day a great deal on a Hasselblad fell in my lap. And I had to get more stuff to support the larger format. And I soon felt like I'd 'grown' as a photographer. Eventually I decided I needed to move up to large format 4x5 to make the photographs I wanted to make. And more stuff was needed, improvements to the darkroom, lenses, meters, etc..

Now I'm shooting 8x10 and just acquired a UV source to start alt process printing. More stuff! I've spent more on cameras and gear in this last year than I think I have in the previous 5 years combined. I have a LOT of gear and I STILL have a long laundry list of stuff I 'need'!

And I don't consider myself a Gearhead. With all these moves up in format and darkroom improvements and just, general buying of more STUFF, I still believe (and tell myself...and my spouse) that it's all only because I'm growing as a photographer and not at all because I might just have the worst, ongoing bout of GAS in the history of my photography career!

Maybe I need a reality check? Maybe I do just want new cameras and new lenses and more stuff, just for the love of GEAR! I freely admit, I do love my cameras and my lenses and my Gitzo tripod. The equipment is for sure part of the appeal of photography for me. But I will still say it's the WORK that keeps me in it. It really is the look of a perfect print, still wet under the light for the first time in the darkroom. I HAVE to make photographs to stay sane, I feel like sometimes. I HAVE to point a camera at something that moves me and make a picture of it. Even of no one else ever sees that picture.

What about you? How much do you really think you need that shiny new Gold Dot Dagor to fulfill your vision?

[Darin Boville]

I seem to be on a curve. For many years I had a Hasselblad kit and a rangefinder, that was it. A few lenses. That was it. Then digital hit. Digital itself was enticing. All that film gear was suddenly cheap. Plus everything was a bit unmoored by the impact of the new technologies.

Some people became vey interested in the craft of film photography, and more of these people seemed to appear the more digital gained ground. Others went all digital and never looked back. Others, like me, sort of expanded their gear arsenal and now are shrinking it again. It's a sort of curve. Hopefully gear-stability is in my future because messing with the gear stuff is, for me, distracting and lowers my productivity.

--Darin

[Cletus]

Darin - thank you, that's an interesting insight about the impact of digital and the way some people became even more adamant about, or interested in, film as a result. I guess I would more or less fall into the category.

Many people have made remarks about being able to finally get that film camera they'd always dreamed of, back in the day when the cost was way beyond the means of any 'amateur' photographer. That's actually what happened to me with my first Hasselblad. I wasn't really looking for one at the time, but had always dreamed of owning a camera like that when the deal of the century suddenly appeared before me.

Nowadays I also think a lot about "minimizing" my kit, but I can't seem to rid myself of the constant need for that one more focal length, or that more suitable tripod head, it just never stops. And to me it's all in the service of improving my work - not necessarily in the "Magic Bullet" sense, but them that might just be denial talking, I don't know!

I still feel like, when there's something on the top of my list, like a lens, it's because I really do feel like its something I need, for something specific, not so much because because I just think I'll make better pictures if only I had.... Know what I mean?

[C. D. Keth]

I have two main rules governing my acquisition of gear.

1. In the course of shooting, I must work around not having something at least 3 times before I even get to think about buying it. For example, I had a 150mm and a 210mm for 4x5 before I bought a 90mm. I worked around that for quite a while before I decided I really would benefit from a wider focal length, which brings me to...

2. New acquisitions must add something to my work that I couldn't do before. That 90mm was not something I could imitate or emulate. The only way to have a photo look wide is to use a wide lens. A failing example would be that I kind of want a geared head, but my 3-way head is doing fine so I keep on with the head I already have.

This obviously won't work with some issues like wanting to dip my toe into another format, but it will keep me from having a cabinet full of lenses I rarely use or a rotating stock of stuff that I just "couldn't pass up."

[rdenney]

Some people develop a style and a vision early on and that suits their objectives. Others search for their particular vision and maybe never find it, even if they produce fine work along the way. Still others find the hobby of messing with camera equipment to be as satisfying and enjoyable as is making photographs. The only thing wrong with any of these is when those in different groups think they are somehow better because of it.

Example: Warren Deck, who was the tuba player for the New York Philharmonic for about 30 years until just a few years ago, was known to change instruments fairly frequently, and to make changes to the instruments he kept even more frequently. He finally found the combination that matched that sound in his head, and was also reasonably playable. That happened many years after he demonstrated that he was a world-class performer by winning the New York job. There are those who might call him a gear-head, and he might even agree with them (I don't know and to my knowledge he's never said). But nobody could complain that it undermined his artistry.

There have also been many who found early on the instrument that fit their voice, and they played that instrument throughout their careers. But they still dabbled with a range of other instruments just for fun. Doing so didn't undermine their art, either.

And then there are guys like me who have lots of instruments. We don't explore the potential of even the worst of them, but nobody has taken any hurt because of our acquisitiveness.

Rick "who has generally bought photographic equipment to provide a particular desired capability, even when that capability wasn't often exploited" Denney

[redrockcoulee]

For some people a single camera is sufficient whereas others need to upgrade their gear constantly. I believe that most of us fall somewhere in between. Six years ago I got to use a Hasselblad system as the place I worked had gone all digital and IMHO it is THE camera for me, I enjoy using it more than any other I have ever owned. I did go through several 4X5 camera until I found one I liked however in my defence the one before the one I have now had seen better days otherwise I would probably still be using it.

I do not see some one with multiple formats a gearhead. Those that are often changing systems are those I consider chasing the magic bullet and those who are always upgrading their gear to the latest and greatest are gearheads. Although I have 35mm , digital DSLR, medium format and large format I am on my third 35mm film camera (the first one was bought in 1974) and the third was originally a second camera so that I could have one with colour and the other black and white. In medium format I traded a bicycle for a Rolleichord in the late 70s and bought my Hasselblad three or four years ago. In large format I still have the first one I bought and in total own four however two are going to be for sale in the next year or so plus I do share them with my wife. In digital I have used Nikons since 2006 and in the spring of 2011 I bought my first DSLR a Pentax K-r.

So I have mutilifple formats but have not really bought that many camera over the years and not one of them has ever been both the latest and greatest. Except perhaps the Holgas and Dianas I have bought for my wife :) For the next year's purchases I seem to have a bit of a list but unlike previous years this list is affordable almost all are lens caps or hoods other then a remote for the K-r. If you are buying or researching new products rather than shooting you are a gear head. If you do more shooting and printing then buying or looking to buy then you are not.

The best way I find to make sure that I am not looking for more lenses to buy is ensuring my bag is not that big :) I do not think you have a problem (at this time)

[Frank Petronio]

One of the appealing things about photography is that, even back in the early 1980s when things were "expensive", you can put together an outfit, however humble, that is capable of producing world-class work, as good as any top professional's work. Back then I used to think that I could - in potential - turn out a print every bit as good as an Ansel Adams print - in my plywood sink and Visqueen-walled, unplumbed, darkroom. It would just be harder is all ;-p

People consisting make images with Holgas and Lomos and other crappy cameras that are amazing works of art. I mean 99.9999% of the time they don't. But they possibly can. And that is pretty cool.

Personally I think it's healthy to explore different cameras and not get too attached to them. If you fall in love with or think that some inanimate object has magical powers... well that is pretty dumb. It's quite liberating to swap that Leica for a Canonet and not miss a beat. Or a Technika for a Crown Graphic. It also means you're a confident, competent, and debt-free photographer.

I do have a chuckle over the photographers who drop megabucks on every fast Canikon zoom or go whole hawg into new Leicas or giant Ebonys. It's revealing to shop for used digital cameras and find plenty of upgraders selling the last generation pro models with only a few thousand clicks on them. But I hope they keep on buying, it's good for the industry and economy, and I like their used prices.

The best camera is a paid-off credit card.

[Darren H]

The best camera is a paid-off credit card.

well said!

[Jim Jones]

I have much more camera equipment than just a few years ago, and take fewer good photos than any time in decades. The limited photographic arsenal forced upon Edward Weston by economics may have been a blessing.

[Corran]

I think anyone who says that they can do everything with one camera and one lens is delusional.

I also think anyone who thinks they need every lens ever created is the same.

There is a balance.

Personally I buy cameras/lenses/whatever based 1) on how much I'll use it and 2) how much value it'll hold. For example, when I got my 58mm XL lens I wasn't too worried about the cost because I got it at about 50% the general used price. So if I HAD to have that money, tomorrow, I could sell it for what I put into it instantly basically. And as we all know lenses generally hold their value. On the flip side, my D800E was expensive and I won't get anywhere near what I paid for it if I ever sell it. But it'll be a workhorse camera for commercial work. So there you go.

[Jody_S]

I buy photo gear based mainly on whether I think I can make a profit selling it. But that has nothing to do with photography, other than the fact that I can do this with photo-related gear because I know what it is and what's valuable. For my actual photography, I tend to just pick up something off the shelf, and I don't really care what it is. 20 years ago I would have gotten into an argument over Canon vs. Nikon glass; these days, I'll pick up whichever of the two is closest. LF gear is much the same, I don't care if I'm using a Schneider or a Rodenstock lens, as much as I care what I paid for it and whether it's value is increasing or decreasing. And whether I can possibly truly take advantage of a lens' potential.

[Dan Fromm]

Phil, do whatever makes you happy. You're putting your resources into photography and hurting no one else (assuming that your spouse, if you have one, goes along with what you're doing). No one will look down on you for having little gear or for having a lot. Stop worrying and go shoot.

[RichardSperry]

Buying and selling gear is just an adjunct hobby. I bought an F100 just to burn the HP5 rolls I get with paper. Then got a holga lens for it for $25, then a lensbaby 3G for $100 for it.

It's fun, and not serious or anything. With the price of used film gear, why not?

I have an 8x10 pinhole camera made from a cardboard box, matte black paint, and black duct tape. Total cost was about $6.

It may take years to find deals on stuff I want, two years for my Saunders 16x20 easel then a second one just fell into my possession with an enlarger buy. 2 years I was searching for a dry mount press, and it came free with the enlarger and second easel.

I want a deal on a clean 65 or 75 lens and then a 300 lens, if it takes years to find them, so be it.

I use an app that searches Craigslist listings in neighboring cities, I've found a lot of my gear that way.

[rdenney]

I think anyone who says that they can do everything with one camera and one lens is delusional.

That's not the question. Who says they can do everything? They have just limited their vision to what they can capture with that one camera and lens. Or, perhaps their vision is so singular that they never have requirements that extend beyond the capabilities of that one camera and lens.

It's true that some just have one camera and lens and then deride others as being gear-heads, but the reverse is just as bad.

Rick "who has lots of cameras and lenses and still can't do everything" Denney

[Corran]

Of course you are right Rick. I merely suck at getting my point across.

[John Kasaian]

If you buy gear you use the gear, you're not a collector.
If you gear you don't use the gear, you are a collector.
If you buy gear you intend on using someday, you're soon broke.

[Frank Petronio]

I don't know, I am packing the car for a shoot today and it is full to the ceiling, with lights and props and stuff... but I only am taking a 150 for the 4x5 and 50s for the digi/35mm. Once you figure out what works why complicate things further?

[jcoldslabs]

If you buy gear you intend on using someday, you're soon broke.

Amen, brother! And my wife will tell you the same thing happens if you buy clothes in a size you hope to be someday. Aspirational spending is a fool's errand but a marketer's wet dream.

Six years ago I lost around 90 pounds and got all new clothes, but being a pessimist I put all the "fat" clothes in boxes in the garage. Well, the 90 pounds came back but so did the old wardrobe without dropping a cent. Thank goodness!

Jonathan

P.S. Oh, and I'm getting crowded out of the room in which I type this by all the gear spilling from the shelves. None of it has made my photographs any better, but I've had lots of fun buying it and shooting with it. Now if I can only force myself to shoot those fifteen-dollar-a-pop Polaroid 8x10s before they dry out all will be good.

[Brian Ellis]

I've bought a lot of photography gear over the years and I enjoyed researching, buying, and using it all. But I've moved to digital almost exclusively and for some reason I don't find digital gear in and of itself very interesting. Which is a good thing for me, I don't read about the gear, don't care about the gear, it's become what I think gear should be - a tool with which to make photographs. But I don't think there's anything wrong with enjoying and buying photographing equipment if that's what you like and if you can afford it. There's many worse ways to spend your money than on photography equipment.

[Cletus]

About two years ago when I was in a depressing creative slump, I suddenly had this impulse and sold my Leica M6 and the few lenses I had for it - well, traded it really - for a pair of Nikon D2X bodies (that were already old, and way behind the curve) an 85/1.4 lens and some other stuff. I'd also been collecting lights and Chimera softboxes and various other studio lighting gear - oh yes, and an actual studio too - because overnight, I had decided I was going to become....wait for it....a COMMERCIAL FASHION PHOTOGRAPHER! Just made up my mind one day I was gonna do that and started buying (and selling) stuff!

So after almost a year (and several thousand dollars in newly acquired gear) it took exactly one shoot with a couple semi-enthusiastic, Craigslist ad-answerer, wannabe models and my ever so promising career as a soon to be Top New York Fashion Photographer was over.

How's that for "acquiring gear to fulfill your vision"? After owning them for a little more then 3 months, I sold off all the Nikon DSLR stuff (before it lost even more value), came out of "the little slump" I'd been in, and went back to my 4x5 and my darkroom. All dreams, wheresoever they had come from, of the previous year had vanished like artificial smoke on a fashion set. I still have a couple packs and heads and a softbox or two, just in case I want to make a portrait of somebody or something, but I rarely break them out.

The whole dizzying experience mostly served to educate me in what kind of photographer I really am, not the ideal - idea of what I thought a Real Photographer should be. Not too much risk of me trying THAT again!

[Diane Maher]

I've bought a lot of photography gear over the years and I enjoyed researching, buying, and using it all. But I've moved to digital almost exclusively and for some reason I don't find digital gear in and of itself very interesting. Which is a good thing for me, I don't read about the gear, don't care about the gear, it's become what I think gear should be - a tool with which to make photographs. But I don't think there's anything wrong with enjoying and buying photographing equipment if that's what you like and if you can afford it. There's many worse ways to spend your money than on photography equipment.

Although I haven't moved exclusively to digital, I came to a similar realization with regards to photo gear. All the cameras and lenses and accessories are tools I use to realize my vision. I think it was after I'd gotten nearly everything on the "want list". It's been a couple of years since my last lens purchase, although I will admit to looking now and then at lenses, I haven't bought any.

I do try to not discuss my gear (or what it cost) to anyone because I feel like they think I am a gear head. Go figure.

[Bill Burk]

...because overnight, I had decided I was going to become....wait for it....a COMMERCIAL FASHION PHOTOGRAPHER! Just made up my mind one day I was gonna do that and started buying (and selling) stuff!

So after almost a year (and several thousand dollars in newly acquired gear) it took exactly one shoot with a couple semi-enthusiastic, Craigslist ad-answerer, wannabe models and my ever so promising career as a soon to be Top New York Fashion Photographer was over...

Great story!
Sounds like the start of a novel.

[Cletus]

Haha! Thanks for the comment Bill! :) what is it they said about "life is stranger than fiction?" or something like that.

At least nobody can ever accuse me of not chasing my dreams after that little debacle ---or that I'm not given to delusions of grandeur and utterly irrational impulses!

...I had my poor, unsuspecting wife all worked up and excited about it too. I actually had her convinced that within the next year or two we would BE in New York, making $300,000 a shoot and living high on the hog!

Sometimes I think I get too carried away with my photography.

[Vick Ko]

Gearhead here.
I like certain kinds of photo gear.
I can't even get close to using some of my stuff to its full potential.
I sometimes buy because of internet reviews or stories of results that other, much more talented photographers can obtain.
And sometimes even sell, before shooting the gear myself.

Yeah, mostly gearhead. And occasional photographer.

There, I feel better that I've admitted it.

Life isn't that long, enjoy it.

:-)

Vick

[Michael Graves]

I'm a confessed gearoholic who is religiously avoiding the 12-step program. I've reached the point where my stuff is running me out of my house and I'm starting to pare it down a bit. However, when I go out shooting, I try to envision what type of image I'm looking for and decide what format I'm going to shoot that day. I like to go out with just three or four lenses at most. On some days, I have given myself a single lens and said, "If you can't shoot it with this lens, you ain't shootin' it."

One thing that I should put right out there is that I do not consider myself an "artist". I am merely a hobbyist. There are several members here who have clearly earned the label of artist and their opinions will certainly count for more than mine.

[marfa boomboom tx]

call it "finger-nail polish" -- stuff done to cover up; to cover idle time. Something easily talked about with strangers; distant anonymous people; someone in the next cell, at the next table.

But not something done that drives, sustains, changes or challenges you.

As long as you use "it" as that, then so what -- just don't buy the polish to sniff it.

Oh, and don't make the mistake that you are, or will be a painter. It is finger-nail polish.

the phrase used to be "equipment poor," for those who had enough money for equipment, only equipment; never enough for ??? who cares, they kept the plates spinning.

marfa, 2000 people, with a view of the world.

[Michael Graves]

...So after almost a year (and several thousand dollars in newly acquired gear) it took exactly one shoot with a couple semi-enthusiastic, Craigslist ad-answerer, wannabe models and my ever so promising career as a soon to be Top New York Fashion Photographer was over....

I know the feeling. I had early dreams of being a professional...to the point of spending my life savings opening a studio. After six months doing the portfolios for a modeling agency in Phoenix I decided that doing it for money was taking all the fun out of it. (Do hookers have the same problem?) Makes me wonder how Frank stays sane...assuming his actually has...

[DrTang]

HEY..the gear is half the fun

seems I am a magnet for tripods, heavy duty lightstands and camera cases and bags - I just cannot turn down a good deal


and cameras and systems

I mean I try to be rational and all..but..something always comes along and well..if I pick up that group of stuff..then sell off the stuff I don't need..I can pay for the 85mm f1.8 lens to play with... but it's konica mount?? so now I need to save that one body too..so might as well keep the 28...

and so on and so on

when I first started here..I got all jacked up on petzvels and soft focus stuff.. so I got some.. and meh.. not my cup o tea.. so now those are gone and I'm on to my next fetish.. which is making square format out of 4x5 and 5x7 cameras (ie: wasting a bunch of area on the film sheet)


but...I must say.. very often I will just grab one camera/lens and go shoot with only that for the day/event with good results

[Cletus]

Life isn't that long, enjoy it.

Vick

Amen brother. Pro, semi-pro, collector, film, digital, whatever. It all falls under the "Pursuit of Happiness" clause as far as I'm concerned.

[Drew Bedo]

Anyone ever see a TV show called "Hoarders"?

My wife says that I have some sort of disorder in that direstion.

[welly]

I've bought a few cameras in the last 12 months. I'm currently very happy with where I am and I think I can probably shoot everything I might want to shoot with either my Toyo field camera or my Cambo monorail. I've got four lenses which cover all focal lengths I've found myself shooting at over the last 6 or 7 years (with digital) and so I think I have all the lenses I might want to use.

Of course, I would love an old brass petzval lens but I see myself as still learning to use the gear I've got so throwing anything else into the mix is just going to confuse me and complicate things! I've only just figured out swings so need to keep my gear at a minimum. I did buy a Cambo 8x10 a few months back, which I've only had one shot out of but I knew with my current methods of transport (bus and train) that it wouldn't be a camera I'd be able to get out regularly. The price was such that I couldn't not buy it for next year when I buy a car and I'll be in a position to take the 8x10 out more regularly.

When I shot digital, I amassed a huge collection of lenses for my D700 and it was just getting ridiculous. I'm glad I'm down to a fairly minimal collection of gear - and everything gets used (bar the 8x10) so I don't feel anything was a waste.

[John Kasaian]

The OP is equating the accumulation of stuff with growing as a photographer.
If it is gear you use, then it likely is.
If it is just gear that is "cool" then likely it isn't.
Too many "gear" distractions can even be detrimental, IMHO.
Not to say there is anything wrong with collecting or restoring old stuff---I do that as well---but I try to keep it seperate from my "usin' gear."

[dmeckert]

i think there's always balance to be sought.

i really enjoy playing with new and different things. i tend to end up with stuff that looks like i shot it regardless of what i use.

when i was in photo school, as i was getting toward graduation, i thought it was entirely necessary to have kit for every possible situation...so i had a digital body...lenses wide, normal, long, macro, zoom, prime...a flash...a location lighting kit...film gear...etc. it was cool to have...but i realized i scarcely used most of it...and over the last few years have severely pared down my gear, and tailored it to what i shoot now. my main kit is a nikon body, a normal zoom, a 50 (too cheap to bother selling, even if it rarely gets used), and an 85, a flash, and a 2-light location kit (albeit with a bevy of modifiers, some rather obscure or one of a kind. lol). and a fuji 6x9.

of course, now that i teach photography, i'm using my students' education as an excuse to indulge my GAS a bit. lol. it never ends. it's only half a dozen or so old film cameras, with a few wides, a macro, and a 135...mainly minolta, with an occasional olympus or canon thrown in. and the kiev 66. and the 4x5 (i'm blaming them...but it's a really tenuous connection...i've really just missed large format for several years). lol

and then there's the leica...but that's a temporary indulgence...it's actually my "new countertops and floors and lasik" fund. >_>


gear can definitely become too much of a focus, but then so can lack of gear. things always seem to swing back when they've gone too far in either direction. i like to try and stay balanced...allowing myself room to play a bit, but not enough that it become about the gear more than the photography itself. i feel like this approach lets me grow however i can, and shed what's unnecessary (much like adolescent brains).