Open Mike: Change for the Sake of Change?

["Open Mike" is the open-topic editorial page of TOP, when Yr. Hmbl. Ed. frets about the stuff that clutters his brain. It is sometimes on-topic, sometimes not. It's supposed to appear on Wednesdays, and sometimes does.]

Something new and novel happened to me yesterday: I had to admit to myself that I like my old digital camera better than my new digital camera. And my old lens better than my new lens.

I won't talk about the cameras themselves or their features, because this isn't really about that. It's more about how we make decisions to change, and why we sometimes change things that don't need changing.

Big warm wet kiss
For some reason, something I read in an audiophile magazine many years ago stuck with me. The writer admitted that he was in a permanent state of constantly changing his system, that he was always looking to upgrade. Then he admitted that the first time he optimized his system, he had landed on a modestly expensive (in the high-end audio world, that would mean "very expensive but not absolutely insane to normal people") system that was suited to his personal tastes; it consisted of tube electronics and Quad electrostatic speakers is all I remember. He described its sound as a "big warm wet kiss." He said something along the lines of, it wasn't accurate but it departed from accuracy in the ways he liked. Then he admitted that when he continued to upgrade that first system, a.) he felt great remorse when he first committed to the dismantling of what had taken him so long to arrive at (by selling some of the essential components such that he could no longer put the original system together again); b.) that he missed that first system for years afterwards; and c.) that he still, years later, periodically got nostalgic for that first system. I might be embellishing the story for present purposes, but I think he also admitted that he hadn't ever liked any "accurate" system he had ever built since then quite as much as he had liked that first one.

The obvious question springs to mind...why hadn't he just kept that first system and been done with it?

I already have one
It's almost like when we like a category of "things" too much, we feel compelled to continue to optimize, to fret and tweak and shop. (Hmm, that would have made a good title for this post..."Optimization Without End.")

There are many things I own or have owned in the past that I don't optimize. In most cases that happens with categories of things that I like but don't really like too much. I like my car, for instance, and I'm not really tempted by new cars. I mean, it'll eventually wear out, of course, and I'll have to replace it. But I'm not talking about that. My thinking about it usually goes like this:

1. Maybe I'll buy a new car.
2. All I can afford is a used one.
3. I already have a used car I like.

Another example for me is my chef's knife. Now, I know knife geeks exist; but I found a chef's knife I liked (my then-girlfriend's amateur chef stepfather had recommended it to her, and I liked hers), located a source even though they had been discontinued, and bought two, one to use and one as a backup. And I was done, folks. I use my knife every day in the kitchen, and I'm perfectly happy with what I have. Zero desire for any further changes. Those two chef's knives are going to see me out. Actually, there's no reason why the one won't, and I'll leave behind the new one in the drawer.

I've replaced my tripod once in 44 years. I really liked my first one and kept it contentedly for a number of decades. When I bought my second one it was an improvement in every way, and now I really like that one and have utterly no desire to look at other tripods. I'm completely happy with it.

And I know lots of people who are perfectly happy with their cameras or their lenses, too—every now and then I hear a comment along the lines of, "I bought my Nikon XX in 2012 and I've been perfectly happy with it ever since." Now, granted, you don't hear a ton of comments like that in the digital photography world because the pace of change was so rapid in 2000–2015, and improvements tended to be large enough to be noticeable. But still, there are people out there who just aren't shopping all the time.

Strange as it may seem.

Historically, there are many photographers who stick with one set of gear for what seems like forever. Even if they don't use the same exact items, they stick with something very similar to it. When Henry Wessel died, he was still using the Leica M3 and the same ancient Canon lens for it that he'd been using for decades. Cartier-Bresson upgraded to the latest Leica M bodies as they came out, but used the same 50mm collapsible Summicron that he had used for virtually all of his pictures since the 1950s. (He did carry other lenses sometimes and tested other lenses occasionally, but when I was leafing through his proof books at Magnum New York with Erich Hartmann, Erich told me that "you can look through book after book and hardly come across a single picture that wasn't taken with the 50mm lens.") I don't know what Michael Kenna's actual gear consists of, but he seems perfectly settled on using film 'Blads for his work, and has been for a long, long time as far as I know.

There are many more examples.

747 to 747, 911 to 911
Sometimes, things actually do develop to a point of sufficiency. Consider, for example, that it took humanity 65 years to get from Kitty Hawk to the Boeing 747 Jumbo jet...and that the 747 has been in service now for 53 years! Granted, there are refinements to the story—later competitors, design changes to the Boeing, etc.—but it looks an awful lot like progress was pell-mell until we got it right and then there just hasn't been a huge burning need to change further.

Sometimes it seems to me that smartphones have already passed that point. Yeah, they continue to evolve, but how much of that is marketing and styleyness and how much of it reflects a genuine need for improvements? Weren't smartphones essentially "there" with, say, the iPhone 6? (Ironically, the cameras might be the most visible things in need of upgrading!)

One way you can tell that the point of sufficiency has been reached is when there start being aficionados of the original "sufficient" models. For example, there are people who actually like the old iPhone 4s, and hasn't Apple introduced models either called the "Classic" or intended to be such? (I don't actually know the details; I don't keep up with phones.)

Take for example the classic Leica. Introduced in 1953, the point of sufficiency was reached by 1984 when they took an M4-P and shoehorned in a manual, non-coupled onboard meter. You can make the argument that everything before the M6 was preamble, and everything after it, postscript. Leica even makes the M10, which I've always argued essentially amounts to a digital replica of the classic Leica rangefinder. (Like Porsche still builds a replica 911. They call it the "911.")

Stuck! Is that bad?
Anyway, I have to admit that I want to like my latest camera best. I do consider it "better." I'm glad I have it and I often use it. I want to like the smaller, slower "Fujicron" that better fits my personal ideology about lenses—that is, what I say I like. But, when you get right down to it, I'm more comfortable with my 2014 camera body and the first, too-big, too-fast 35mm-equivalent lens I got with it. I like using the equipment better and I like the pictures I get with it better. It fits. It suits. It serves. Still.

So why not just stick with that?

The inescapable conclusion is because I can't. I'm too addicted. Addicted to change for the sake of change; to tweaking or optimization. I'm irrevocably settled into a comfortably permanent state of "upgradeitis." Upgrading is a part of my wiring, it seems like...my muscle memory, in typing terms. New is always best, YouTube tells me. I've been upgrading since I bought my first digital camera! I can't stop now. Can I?

Mike

Product o' the Week:

A fantastically comfortable ergonomic mouse for PC users. Should be considered incompatible with Mac unless you want to use only default settings. Available in regular and small sizes, right and left hand, and wired and wireless. WARNING to Mac users: Do NOT download USBOverdrive! It broke my computer. But really, for you PC users, you won't believe how easy on your hand this mouse is.

The link above is a portal to Amazon, through which most anything you purchase will be credited to TOP. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Original contents copyright 2021 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

albert w erickson: "Mike, I haven't commented in while and thought I would jump in with a comment. A wise man said 'wealth consists not of having great possessions, but having few wants.' Not really sure who said it but it is very true.

"I have been going through some anguish considering which camera to get rid of. I now have two Nikon Z cameras, a Nikon D750, and a Fuji X-T3. According to my wife I am a hoarder. I have promised to relieve myself of one or two cameras. The problem is the D750 is my favorite camera. It's more than five years old and old technology but I love it still. The Fuji is a great travel camera because of the small lenses. That leaves the brand-new Z's. They are great cameras and take beautiful pictures and all that, but there is something I love about the IQ and feel of the D750. It really feels like a camera to me. This is clearly a first-world problem and one I will solve soon. In all probability I will sell the Z6 and keep both the D750 and the Z7 II. The Fuji needs to stay because I love walking and shooting with the small primes.

"I feel better already having confessed my crazy dilemma. Thanks for the post; you really hit a nerve with me. Be safe my friend."

Mike replies: As a public service we should probably do a post showing eight or ten pictures of guys with outrageously huge camera collections. Then when readers' spousal units give them a hard time for having too many cameras, they could show her or him that post and say, still think I have a problem? —Mike, CPE (camera purchase enabler)

Terence Morrissey: "This brings up a good point: how often should you upgrade your camera body? I asked that question to the late Michael Reichmann, who recommended every second new model."

Benjamin Marks: "As a fellow gear-head, I have noticed this too. I have many cameras, and many lenses, but just two axes. OK. Three axes. Actually, now that I think of it, three axes, two hatchets, and a maul—oh and a wedge and a small sledgehammer. And an extra wedge from that time I couldn't find my wedge at the beginning of the heating season, but couldn't spend more time looking for it. We burn a lot of firewood. Sigh.

"I think there is something about what I call the 'modularity of purpose' that encourages acquisition. The maul you use to split cord wood is not the tool you need to make kindling. A medium-weight axe will get stuck in a large, wet, piece of wood. But the maul's weight and geometry make it perfect for the task. The maul, on the other hand, is too heavy to be wielded with any finesse. So if you are liberating a small stack of kindling from a straight-grain piece of cord wood, a hatchet or a wedge and hammer really are the tools you need. So would one medium weight axe be enough? Maybe. Is it the best tool for all jobs? Not even close. Same with chef's knives and paring knives.

"But you've also identified the allure of the value 'upgrade.' Many of these are designed to enhance manufactured gear that is produced at a price point. Seiko, for instance, made their SKX dive watches with a mineral glass crystal, the trade name of which is Hardlex. It is reasonably tough stuff, but will get scuffed after several years of daily watch wear. For about $50 more, they (or you) could install a synthetic sapphire crystal on their dive watches, which is superior in every way. Sapphire is pretty close to diamond in hardness—you can wear a watch with a sapphire crystal every day for 15 years and it will not have a scratch. Once you replace the inferior Hardlex with the superior Sapphire you are better off as a user, but hosed as a collector. Why? Because collectors put a premium on unmodified watches. And so it goes.

"There is also an issue of gender lurking here. I am trying to think of modular goods that are susceptible to upgrades: computers, cars, motorcycles, firearms, stereos, watches, sailboats—really boats of any kind. Maybe I have tunnel vision here, but it seems to me that the pursuit of these gear categories breaks down (at a guess) 95/5 along male/female lines. Most of my photographer friends who are women have one or two cameras and that's it. Not so with the guys. It is a strange and beautiful world."

Ilkka: "I agree. I fully agree. Up to the point when you said you must ‘upgrade.’ No you mustn’t! The only thing I might add is a suggestion to buy good quality, whether it is a tripod, or a kitchen knife, or tools, or a lens. Maybe camera as well. Then there will be no need to change it for decades, maybe even in a lifetime. I still use a Gitzo tripod and Linhof ball head I bought 40 years ago. I bought binoculars 30 years ago and just sent them in for service. First time. The manufacturer offered to open them up and clean them for free. I have a Tenba bag I bought 30 years ago. It is a bit rough around the edges and needed some simple repairs, but it is still better than most of the other bags I have bought over the past ten years."

Bear.: "When my parents finally downsized from their empty-nester family home, my mother had the most brilliant brainwave of her long, married life. She told my father that she wanted the best washing machine, dishwasher, vacuum cleaner and iron that money could buy—she asked, please go research them and acquire them for our new home.

"Being male, my father did—he spent weeks searching the Internet, telephoning factories, reading consumer magazines, and testing various models on shop floors. After careful consideration, the new appliances were purchased at great expense (about which my mother carefully said nothing) and delivered. He then spent days ensuring they were properly installed, reading instruction manuals to learn all the features, etc.

"Thereafter, they were his babies. My mother is not allowed to use them—and she has not had to wash, do the dishes, vacuum the house, or do any ironing ever since. My father does it all. Hmm."

Mike replies: Now that is a wonderful story. Really tickles me. And you know what? As I read it I found myself instinctively sympathizing with your Dad. Ha ha! Thanks for that.

Comments

[Tex Andrews]

In a thread on The Pentax Forums, several of us have been saying the same thing over the last few days. The really compelling/necessary reasons to upgrade during the first decade of the digital revolution have largely vanished now for stills work---an excellent 2014 camera is still excellent. It seems to me the more interesting and significant advances are in video right now. I'd say digital medium format, too, except that a) it's a niche, and b) cameras like the 645Z and the first Fuji's are still incredible stills machines, and it's now a "generation" behind (looked at in one way, which I don't).

[Mike Ferron]

Change for the sake of change. Despite digital investment I much prefer shooting B&W film in different formats. I purchased a beautiful Wisner 4x5 technical field that was to replace my old Toyo 45F.
The Wisner is art work to look at, so nice it belongs more as a display piece than a working camera. But I took it out and found the movements to be frustrating to operate and despite the quality not as smooth as the all metal, precision Toyo. Solution? I put a bright screen on the Toyo and will sell the Wisner and hopefully get back close to what I paid for it. Lesson learned? Maybe.

[Albert Smith]

The Leica M3 vs. M6 thing is not quite the same and an early generation digital camera vs. a more modern model.

The film cameras were just light tight containers for film. The film was the sensor and processor and could be inserted into a 40 year old model or the latest one. Digital imaging keeps evolving and at least on-paper renders what came before at a minimum dated, at worse obsolete.

That said, my only full frame digital is a Nikon D700 which gives me images that look great. It is probably 5 generations behind the current sensors, but I can't see upgrading. I'm also using older Fujifilm cameras, with no intention of tossing for the newer ones.

I refuse to a be a follow on beta tester for the newest thing. After the bugs are worked out, and it is about to be replaced is the time to buy.

[Zyni Moë]

You only know this now? Is not clear from your post if you just realise it now or if you just decide to write about it now. I am sorry but like many people (like me) you are probably an addict, and your addiction is newness.

The new gadget case is particularly nasty because it turns into useless complexity: when it is no longer usefully possible to make a machine better, then to get people to buy a new machine you either make it better in a useless way (very small number of peoples need a camera with a billion pixels), or you add complications to it. These complications do not make it better, just more complicated. And your brain is not getting bigger so soon you no longer understand the machine you are using as it is too complicated.

But new gadgets are not the only newness you can be addicted to. I am mathematician: I work with paper and pen (well, and sometimes LaTeX to type papers, but that is typing what I know already, the work is paper and pen). Well, paper is just paper and pens are just pens ... except no, you can always want a better, nicer, pen which will help you think better (but it won't), and nicer, better paper which ... also will not help at all.

And I am guitarist, and the sort of music I play really uses guitars which stopped changing in the 1960s, and aplification & FX which stopped not long after that. I do not need more strings or more knobs or more volume (usually less volume) or more ... anything. But ... I think I need better wood, or an older guitar, or a lighter guitar or a thinner guitar, or a guitar owned by a famous person.

And so we enlessly seek the newness to which we are addicted and which will prevent us achieving anything good.

(And, just to keep us hooked, the newness is sometimes good newness. I am not very big but for a long time I have played a thick guitar (Gibson ES-175). Now, because of newness-craving I have a thinner (and lighter) one (Heritage H-575) and, well, it is just much easier and it is also much better than my loved 175 though I do not admit this in company. And so because it worked now my addiction looks for other guitars again, or will do soon.)

[Jeff]

The condition is commonly known, in photo circles at least, as GAS.

[Robert Roaldi]

Need gets overridden by want all the time. We like new toys, it seems.

I had an interesting email exchange with a friend about purchasing a new car, which was prompted by my having made my last car payment on my current car 2 weeks ago. He had reached the same milestone in 2017. He felt the pull to buy a new car at that time even though he still liked his car, in fact still does to this day. But he knew that the longer he lived without having to make a monthly loan payment, the more he would resist doing so. I know how he feels now and it has only been 2 weeks.

[Richard Parkin]

I don’t know why that mouse is incompatible with the Mac but if it’s the buttons one can find out which number each is by trial and error and assign them in MacOS.

[Simon Grosset]

Is this because shopping (for non-essentials such as food) now seems to be a leisure activity? And when did that happen?

[c.d.embrey]

I purchased my Canon 40D in Sept, 2007. It was the first 40D delivered at the Calumet store in Santa Ana, California. It replaced my Canon 20D. I still have it. I used it for both advertising and editorial work, plus personal motorsports and surfing shots.

Eight megapixels (20D) is overkill for either the printed page or 5K screens—the 40D's ten megapixels is more than sufficient. I'm not a spendthrift, therefore I've no reason to update.

[Stan B.]

Obtaining and displaying the latest and greatest proclaims one's economic chops, producing a superior work from modest means testifies to one's creative chops.

Nothing wrong with the pursuit of perfection, long as you realize it's often more an ideal, than a permanently sustainable reality.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Kitchen gear is an interesting place to compare male / female acquisition patterns (if you can sort out who actually wanted pieces found in a shared kitchen).

Maybe it's just because ads are now very individually targeted, but the kitchen equipment ads that I see feel to me aimed at men.

Could be as simple as a tradition that men are allowed to bleed (at arterial levels) into their hobbies, and women are not (American 20th century culture, generalization and of course not universally true).

But I still look at the Misen ads Facebook serves me a bit wistfully.

But, personally, I'm on my third new kitchen knife after about a 35-year hiatus, and the first was my first ceramic blade, the second was an unsatisfactory replacement when the tip on the first one broke, and the third is a satisfactory replacement :-) . And we have a new Instantpot, but it replaces a 40-year-old rice cooker, a 30-year-old pressure cooker, and two more recent (maybe only a decade!) slow cookers. (Really; the old appliances, which worked fine, have already gone to Goodwill.) And I've already used it more than I ever used the slow cookers, and I hadn't used the pressure cooker in decades, and it's not quite as nice as the old Panasonic rice cooker but it's good enough (as expected).

[John Camp]

For a long time, Windows machines were simply better than Apples for work purposes. There was more software, the software was more advanced, there was a great variety of available keyboards, etc. Eventually, Apple caught up. In terms of both hardware and software, it became sufficient, though it never had the wide flexibility of PCs. But the operating system: glorious. For people who simply wanted to work on a computer, it really greatly surpassed (IMHO) the confusing Windows systems. And (IMHO) the early 27-inch iMacs were close to perfect. They were the 747 of computers. But Apple then had to screw with them, and they have become less and less perfect as they've gotten thinner and sleeker. The early iMac had a built in CD player, for example, so you could pop in your favorite album and listen to some tunes while you worked. Now, a CD player is a plug-in accessory that sucks up one of your few USB slots and clutters up your desk. Apple then began this process of almost annual OS upgrades, which means you've always got some sort of software problem. I depend on my computer for work, and Word for Mac is no longer compatible with Microsoft's PC versions (in some minor but absolutely maddening ways) and Word is the standard software in the publishing industry in which I work. After messing with Windows 10 in a Best Buy store, I reluctantly decided I could live with it, and ordered a Lenovo iMac look-alike that will probably become my work machine. I still like the Apple OS better than Windows, but I can't live with Apple's constant screwing around and chasing after fashion. Bottom line: The upgrades made me downgrade.

[Andy F]

I think I’m at that point with my Fuji X-T2. I’ve had it over 4 years now and despite the temptations of the Nikon Z system (in part nostalgia: my first ‘real’ camera was a D70 and I loved it), I can’t honestly justify upgrading to an X-T4. About the most I can convince myself is acceptable is something like a Ricoh GRIII, since it’s different enough from my main camera that is fills a functional gap. Even then, I have the Fuji 27mm pancake, so do I reeeeally need the Ricoh?

[Michael J. Perini]

Early Digital Cameras were amazing in concept , and allowed us to glimpse the promise of a digital workflow. In execution they fell a little or a lot short. For a decade, there were real reasons to upgrade---newer cameras, really were enough better to make a practical difference.
We formed some 'bad' habits. "Gear' got more attention than pictures.
Camera makers made great stuff and 'got fat' while expecting the bubble to last.
Now, cameras are so good , that it is really difficult to think of any technical deficiencies that we wish to be corrected in 'Next year's Model'
We are much closer to Pictures taking precedence again, where we mostly don't care about the gear.
That doesn't mean we don't appreciate it, or enjoy it, but cameras go back to being tools, and like tools good ones last a long time.

So I would say, it's nothing to stress about, go make pictures with whatever camera feels comfortable.

[Rob L.]

Well, I can say nothing to this but I bought that lens with the express idea of it being the perfect size, weather sealed, etc...

But as I sold it to you, ya see how that went!:)

The Fuji 35 1.4 is slower to focus, less weather resistant, and bigger, and I just like it better. Shooting that on my old XT-1 is just fun. The 16 1.4 on the XH-1 is just the same.

[John Fleming]

To "albert w erickson", the quote "Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants." is from Epictetus. My trusty old Nikon D750 is almost six years old now but, when I look at the latest and greatest new cameras, I don't see enough new features to make me consider buying it.

[Dogman]

I like to downgrade these days. I like older cameras. Dinosaurs like me. With optical viewfinders instead of video screens, eye-size video screens. I like old Nikons and old Nikon autofocus lenses. With the screwdriver type AF. I also like the old manual lenses but my old eyes can't focus crap anymore so let the camera do it. I like the D700 more than the D800 or D810. Never tried the D850. Never had any interest in the Z series.

The problem is, I'm buying too many old cameras and old lenses. This is as bad as upgrading all the time! I keep buying bigger bags but they're harder to carry--D700s are heavy.

For relief from carrying all that ancient technology, I have my Fujis. I love the little Fujicron lenses. I love their size and weight and speed. I love their image quality as well. Of course I use them on my old X-Pro2 bodies. Because I like the older bodies better than the newer X-Pro.

[Sixblockseast]

I have no intentions to upgrade my X-T3 any time soon. I would certainly consider a smaller companion camera (ideally a new version of the X70) but I don't need a "better" camera to replace my current one.

I'm also perfectly happy with my Samsung Galaxy S8+ first released in 2017, though perhaps I wouldn't be if I used it more as a photography tool, which I don't.

[Mark Sampson]

You mentioned Henry Wessel and Michael Kenna. I suspect that they didn't/don't buy new cameras for a simple reason; They had pictures to make, and their cameras had become 'invisible' to them. That is, they could think about their pictures, and make them, without having to think about their cameras.
Getting lost in 'menu hell', or wondering if a new lens might have 2 more lp/mm in the corners wide-open than the current model, are not ways to help you make better pictures.

[Brandon P]

Great thoughts. I had been thinking some on this recently when the X-E4 was announced. My first step into the mirrorless market was a three-year-old Fuji X-E2. Though I loved the images, I hated the backwards step in video capabilities and losing some of the function I was used to with my old Canon gear. When the X-E3 came out, I saw that nearly all my misgivings when I purchased the X-E2 were resolved (including having a capable video camera when needed).

I was nervous about how I'd feel when the X-E4 was announced, but after I read about it and all the decisions they made with it, I felt...content. I realized that if my X-E3 were to die today, I'd go out and buy another X-E3. There is nothing about the new generation that calls to me except that that it is new. That's a nice feeling.

[jp41]

Mike, what is the make and model of the chef's knife that you like so much?

[It is a Zwilling J.A. Henckels Germany *****FIVE STAR 8" chef's knife.

It's this one, with the contoured handle:

https://amzn.to/3w1duQr

I think I got mine on closeout, and now the price has gone the other way if the ones available on Amazon are representative. --Mike]

[Stephen S.]

I bought an Olympus E-M5 II several years ago to use for work. After a scare with a corrupt memory card almost lost half a day's work, I "upgraded" to an E-M1 II for its dual card slots.
I sold the E-M5 II to fund the purchase, but I later missed the look and feel of it, so I bought a second one as a "backup body," but when I never needed that backup, and the job wrapped up, I couldn't justify keeping it so I sold it.
I still found myself looking longingly at photos of it online, reminiscing about it, until one day two justifications came together at once: I decided some of my smaller primes looked ridiculous on the E-M1 II, and although the Pen F seemed like a good body for them, the E-M5 II was just better in many ways for me, and I came across an eBay listing for a reasonably-priced Limited Edition E-M5 II that is in a colour reminiscent of the OM-3 Ti. That sealed the deal. I bought my third E-M5 II, knowing that its status as a "collectible" would help justify finally hanging on to this one forever.

[BJ]

I think it was byThom who said somewhere in the late 00's essentially "if you're not making good photos with the digital cameras you own, it's not the camera"

I've taken that to heart and while I'd like to upgrade, I still use my D300 with various lenses that are all at least 10 years old.

But, I have shot much more with my cell phone, and that's likely to continue. And the lens improvements there have been the biggest change.

[richardp-london]

I can't remember where I came across the story - maybe in Paul Auster's lovely anthology of True Tales - but I liked the old guy dragged unwillingly shopping for a new hat. Unhappy with everything... suddenly, unexpectedly, he finds the perfect one. His wife soon crushes that triumph: "it's your own old hat, that you left on the counter!"

[Olybacker]

The thing that is a priceless commodity is the time to use the kit that you have. If you have to earn a living in a 'proper job' to pay the bills then the temptation is to long to be photographing all the time.

If you earn a living as a pro photographer, having enough time and energy for personal work is so precious. Sadly, many pros find the enthusiasm for their own photography dims and declines after the working day is done and some of them rarely pick up a camera other than to satisfy a client.

The more kit you have, then the more time you have to spend organising it all and agonising what to take out with you when you are free to photograph at will.

Hey, don't let me put you off, but sometimes 'less is more' is a good adage to work with. And not just in picture content. ;-)