Tag Archives: obsession

Commentary, Equipment, Ideas

Photography and Gear Fetishes (Another Adapted Forum Post)

10 Comments

Earlier this week I dropped in on a photography forum in which the OP (original poster) suggested that the causal correlation between buying Really Expensive Gear and producing better photographs was weak. Oh, yeah!

Here is a slightly adapted version of my contribution to that discussion:

I’ve thought quite a bit about why so many “photography enthusiasts” seem to be much more interested in acquiring photography gear than in making photographs. Reasons might include:

1. Equipment is necessary in order to make photographs, so acquiring some is not unimportant.
2. Because it is, frankly, easier to write about gear in definitive (or seemingly definitive) ways than to write competently about photographs, there is much more written about gear – and newbies should be forgiven for having a false impression that the gear one has is more important than the photographs one makes.
3. Almost all of us do find the equipment fascinating to some extent. Some grow past this, but for some it ends up being more about possessing expensive and supposedly high-end stuff than anything else. (Photography is not the only area where this occurs.)
4. Because people more often encounter photographers when they are operating cameras than when they are exhibiting photographs, they associate the gear with the activity more than they associate photographs with it.
5. Some want to look like (what they imagine) professional photographers (look like).
6. Some are told, before they have enough experience to question it, that they must have “the best” gear if they are going to make photographs. I’ve actually seen rank beginners struggling with $6000 bodies and sets of L primes or big white telephotos… for their family vacations.
7. Some love to shop.

[The OP’s] notion that the causal correlation between expensive gear and photographic skill or quality is weak is one that I would agree with.

I think that a “cure” for the counter-productive obsession with gear at the expense of photographs may be to do everything in your power to focus on photographs – not photography, not cameras, not lenses, etc. If you are not or do not become passionate about producing photographs, then you might want to consider a different hobby. :-)

G Dan Mitchell Photography | Flickr | Twitter (follow me) | Facebook (“Like” my page) | LinkedIn | Email
Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

Commentary, Ideas, Tongue in Cheek

Regarding Sharpness. And Obsession.

3 Comments

We have all seen the lengthy discussions about “which lens is sharpest.” While the ability of a lens to resolve detail is certainly important, it is not the only thing that is important. And in many cases, knowing which is the sharpest lens is not as important as know which among a number of sharp alternatives best suits your needs. I stumbled into another discussion of this topic online today and posted the following as my contribution. (Slightly edited here from the original post.)

Folks sometimes allow themselves to become completely distracted by “sharpness” to the point that they overlook a whole bunch of other important issues in their quest to find the holy grail of “sharp.” This can become the equivalent to realizing that good tires are important on a car, and then deciding to buy a particular car because it comes with the “best” tires… but is too big to fit in your garage, costs twice your annual income, has a terrible repair record, needs a tune-up every 750 miles, and only comes in a color your spouse hates.

For a few people doing certain types of very critical work, printing very large, working slowly and methodically, and willing to forego the compensatory advantages of other lens options, lenses like the excellent TS models, lenses from another manufacturer that only work with adapters, classic primes, and so forth might make some sense.

But just because a lens might measure a bit better to some extent in one of the areas that is measurable (e. g. “sharpness”), it does not necessarily follow that it is a better lens, nor that alternatives that may measure differently in sharpness – but are very nearly as good – will not also be excellent performers. It is also not true that these specialized lenses are required to produce large and effective prints.

It is interesting to watch people go through a process that may look something like the following at times, as they…

1. decide they need a sharper kens.
2. research lens sharpness.
3. consider only sharpness and overlook or dismiss other issues, including those mentioned in the sources analyzing sharpness.
4. decide that some lens is the “sharpest” – frequently some expensive prime, the most expensive zoom they can find, an alternative brand, a specialized TS, etc.
4.5. lust after said lens for some period. The excitement builds…
5. purchase the aforementioned Really Really Sharp Lens.
6. use the new lens and glory in it’s pure Divinely Sharp Wonderfulness, thereby confirming their wise choice.
7. share their wonder with others.
8. make more photographs, and eventually come to find out that a) in real photography the sharpness difference is rarely visible, b) there are downsides to using the sharper lens, c) the downsides sometimes compromise or lose the shot, and d) in many cases their previous “less sharp” lens proves just as useful and effective.
9. note that the new super Super Lens, while useful, begins to spend more time in the bag, and…
10. learn an important lesson or two about Lens Lust… or else repeat the cycle with a different WonderLens. :-)

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that sharpness is unimportant. I’m just encouraging people to keep things in perspective.

G Dan Mitchell Photography | Twitter | Friendfeed | Facebook | Facebook Fan Page | Email

Commentary, Ideas

Things that sometimes baffle me about photographers and photography

11 Comments

This is by no means a complete list, but inspired by seeing one of these oddities in a post earlier today I thought I’d write it up.

  • “Unboxing videos” of new cameras. Why would someone make a 5 or 10 minute video of the act of opening the box that their new camera came in and then lovingly taking out… the manual, the USB cables, the styrofoam inserts, the warranty card, and on and on and on – often with narration and sometimes even background music. Do people actually watch these?
  • Spending thousands and thousands of dollars on “the best” camera, lens, etc. when one isn’t really a photographer and doesn’t really make photographs all that much and perhaps only shares the odd jpg or letter size print with friends and family.
  • Getting caught up in the “brand wars” between manufacturers like Nikon and Canon. They both make really, really fine equipment. Both are used by a lot of excellent photographers. Really wonderful photographs are produced using both systems every day.
  • Assuming that there is only one best “whatever” in photography. There is no such thing as “The Best… camera, lens, tripod, photographer, memory card, place to shoot, time of day to shoot, filter, brand, store, paper…” First, there are many good versions of each. Second, what is best for one person may not be best for another.
  • Obsessing over very tiny and insignificant equipment “flaws” or differences. The classic is, of course, choosing a less functional lens over a more functional lens because the less functional lens might measure .001% better resolution at 100% magnification on the test bench. Related are obsessions over very tiny differences in noise in digital cameras, concern about small difference in camera burst rate, worry that your lens might vignette some…
  • Thinking that you have to “take a position” on zooms versus primes. (Zooms and primes are both great, and you have my permission to use both… ;-)
  • Secret shooting locations – unless the area is fragile and too much use would damage it, if ten good photographers shoot it you’ll get ten different interpretations.

Anyone else?