Maybe Cameras Do Matter?
Like everything else, it depends.
Cameras don’t matter. Right? I’ve written copiously illustrated articles supporting my contention that, on the whole, cameras do not matter all that much (please see links at the end). Cameras is tools. Any hammer will drive a nail. Any camera can take a pitcher. Amirite?
I try not to be too assertive. I waffle and weasel. I could be wrong. Right? So, my contention that “cameras don’t matter” was challenged this morning when I got my daily email from Fstoppers .com. I was skeptical, but listening.
Coming to you from Rick Bebbington, this great video discusses why photo gear matters. Photographers often say, “gear doesn’t matter,” but this can be a bit of a misleading oversimplification.
The phrase “A misleading oversimplification” is what got my attention. I watched the entire video (which is a little disjointed, but Rick gets his points across). He is not suggesting you sell the children to buy the latest and most fabulous gee-golly-whiz-bangy thingy.
He is saying that good gear helps in many ways that I perhaps hadn’t fully considered. I agree with many of his points; I have even made some of them myself.
- Today’s gear is even more awesome than only ten years ago.
- Having the best kit you can afford is definitely helpful.
- — Note he is not saying you must buy pro-level kit unless you seriously intend to be or are a professional.
- Better (= more expen$ive) gear has advantages, and is why working pros will spend more to get more.
- — Ruggedness
- — Weather sealing
- — In-body and/or in-lens stabilization
- — Better quality, higher resolution sensors with greater dynamic range
- — Ergonomics; top-tier bodies are designed with the human hand in mind, not always true of less $pendy models
- Rick also emphasizes shooting raw and learning the fine points of post-processing in a good raw processor. That’s important; the raw capture is only about a quarter of the final image.
Comment on the Fstoppers article by Andrew Pick
A few years back I was photographing a wedding with a pair of Canon 6D’s. While outside taking photos of the couple it suddenly started raining heavily. I ran back to the hotel, but was unable to prevent my cameras getting wet. One of them stopped working and I was forced to shoot the rest of the wedding with just one camera. The Canon 6D is not a professional camera, but still capable of excellent results. You would probably be hard pressed to tell the difference between a photo taken with the 6D and one taken with a 5D MarkIV under identical conditions. What I learned that day however, is that the reason professional photographers use professional cameras and lenses is because they are much more durable and reliable. You can depend on them to keep on working. I think this is one area where gear does matter. Expensive equipment may not make you a better photographer, but it is built to last and won’t let you down at a critical moment.
Andrew Pick got me thinking. My cameras-don’t-matter assertion has its foundation in my own deep, broad experience. I happily twist cameras well beyond their design specs because I know how. I have asserted for years that I believe I could shoot a wedding with the prosumer kit I now have, pictured below on the right. I use it for most staged events. It is light yet versatile, covering a range of full-frame focal lengths from 15mm to 315mm. As a sometime event photographer, it has never let me down. Two bodies back each other up. I would only be crushed if the little workhorse Zeiss 16–70 f/4 went down, but I’d figure something out. That’s what pros do based on in-depth experience.
My current cameras are very sophisticated, but they are not weather sealed. They are lightly built, for me a feature, not a bug, but I haven’t bashed them about like I would were I still working daily assignments. I guesstimate that I shot around six or seven hundred weddings in my career. I used three Hasselblads in rotation, and more often than not one was in the shop. My Sonys don’t even have dual card slots. They are called “prosumers” for a reason. When I claim I could shoot a wedding with them, the emphasis is on A wedding — one — and I’d worry more about me holding up than the equipment.
My compact kit consists of two Sony A6400 bodies with three overlapping zooms: Sony SEL1018 10–18mm f/4.0 superwide Zoom Lens (15–27mm equivalent); Sony/ZEISS SEL1670Z Vario-Tessar 16–70mm f/4.0 (24–105 equivalent); and Sony E 55–210mm f/4.5–6.3 OSS, (83–315 equivalent). In practice, I almost always have the 16–70 on one body and the 55–210 on the other, and I make probably three-quarters of the pictures with the 16–70. The superwide gets less use than I anticipated. I use cross-body straps of soft, very slick material that glide over my shoulders. I drop a couple of charged batteries into my pocket. The bag stays in the car unless I need something, such as another battery, or a flash, or the superwide.
Some outdoor jobs spread over large areas require more reach. I treasure my Sony FE 70–300mm SEL70300G f/4.5–5.6 G OSS Lens (105–450 equivalent), a monster weighing twice as much as the little bodies but unparalleled for reach. My Sony E PZ 18–105mm f/4 G OSS (27–158 equivalent) is its companion. It gives me a little more reach than my 16–70 Zeiss, but it is also heavier.
I carry a flash with extra batteries, but it usually stays in the bag in the car. I know how to use it, but I prefer the look of the ambient light and find the dynamic range of my half-frame sensors is more than adequate when processing raw files in Lightroom or ACR.
Ergonomics are less important to me. I admit, the compact bodies I prefer are not made for my hands. My Sony A6400s offer touch screens that I disable because my fat fingers (and nose) upset the applecart. I have to disable or move other features to prevent accidental resettings costing pictures. I have to have matched bodies to avoid getting confused (age-related brain fog — I hope — not something worse).
The bottom line is that my kit does exactly what I want, when I want it. I flubbed around for years with tiny-sensor point-and-shoots with fixed zooms. I tortured them into doing things that the experts said couldn't be done, but I was also sometimes frustrated, passing up shots because, even with skill and determination, there were photos I couldn’t make because the gear was just not up to it. Rick Bebbington makes a strong case that good kit makes for happier photographers. I agree! I am happier now.
I am still proud of my earliest digital work, shot in JPEG with dinky P&Ss. I wouldn't show them if I weren’t. But what I own today is precisely what I need. When I venture forth with my camera, I know I will return with something. Not great art. Not earth-shattering. But I will like it and be happy to show it to you. That is ultimately what matters, whether cameras do, or don’t.
📸As always, thanks for looking in. I sincerely appreciate it! 😊👍
