Saturday, December 18, 2010

It's a tool

It's been a while, but what the heck?

I recently had a conversation with an acquaintance on one of the popular social media sites.
He asked me what I thought the next year may hold in store when it comes to the release of new cameras from a certain manufacturer.

I gave him my thoughts. The conversation then went back and forth for some time regarding the merits of this current camera versus that current camera versus another current camera.

It was in fact quite a pointless discussion as he tended to disregard the initial question he himself had asked. Later he mentioned that he enjoyed a good debate on the matter. I did say to him that he has enough experience in this game - indeed he is quite an accomplished and successful photographer - to make up his own mind on what kind of gear he wants to buy.

One thing that kept cropping up was his view that the Nikon D3x was massively overpriced and not good value for the money. Now it seems to me that his reference to the cost was because it is a camera that he would like to use for the new line of work he intends to get into. Indeed, I reckon it is the perfect camera for what he wants to do. My own view on the cost is totally the opposite of his. I reckon it is worth every cent and so does every photographer that I know who actually owns one.

Does that mean that his view is wrong and mine is right? Or vice-versa? Nope. Not at all. It just means we look at the same item with a different set of values. If I could actually afford one I would get it tomorrow. No hesitation.

This same sort of thinking also arose recently when I was shooting for a magazine. The brief was to get shots of tradesmen using tools on building sites as well as studio cover shot (at top of post). The major shots were of power tools supplied by the magazine for the article.

This guy was about 15 feet up the ladder. An SB-900 flash on a very tall light stand into his face and an SB-800 held by another tradesman was used to light the wall. Using remote wireless flash systems on modern digital gear makes this sort of work a lot easier than in days gone by.

However we also did some grab shots of one of the men using a hammer. Here's the point - the hammer he was using costs around $300! Yep, $300.

Would you pay $300.00 for this hammer? To the tradesman it is worth it. To others, maybe not.

Now, no-one who knows me well could ever honestly describe me as anything like a handyman or even remotely dextrous and capable with tools. So if I needed a hammer I would go down to a local store and spend maybe $30 or $40 dollars on one. Hey I don't even know the prices - I'm just picking that figure out of my head.

However - for that tradie a hammer that costs $300 makes a lot of sense. For us lay folk it seems awfully expensive.

Same with the tools a photographer uses. There are obviously a lot of pros around the globe who can justify the cost of a D3x. There are still others who can't do so. Horses for courses.

(wait until late next year when the next model comes out - some folk are gonna faint at the cost)

Like any field of endeavor you can get something that will do the job and will do it pretty well. Or you can get the tool that is undoubtedly the best for the job. Of course it depends on finances too. Either way, only the end user can decide what is worth it for her or him.

I've always believed that in photography you get the best that you can - at least the best gear you can possibly afford. The first SLR I bought was when I was a teenager. It was an old Ricoh Singlex TLS. Even when I got it new in late 1976 it was outdated. Still, I learned a lot with that machine. Still got it too although it does need a service.

My first SLR - Ricoh Singlex TLS. Outdated even when I got it new in December 1976

In June 1981 I got my first Nikon - an FE. Still got that too. Still use it. Recently I have been shooting Ilford black and white in it. Feels great. There's something about getting back to where it began and enjoying the image making process in the way I did it for so many years.

My first Nikon. The FE with its original E series 50mm f1.8. It's been bashed around over the years but works perfectly.

Will I go back to using that one or any of the other film cameras I have when I do commercial work? I can't see it happening. While I love using film for personal or fine art work, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to use anything other than digital for commercial work.
And if I can make that distinction, then it also makes perfect sense to make the distinction that the digital equipment I use should be the best possible equipment that I can get.

Yes, they are only tools. Yes, some seem to be outrageously priced (just as a $300 hammer seems outrageous to me). However, and this is the point that I think may have eluded my earlier mentioned acquaintance, no-one forces anyone to buy anything. If you want it or need it and you can afford it, get it. If you don't, don't.

Simple really.

Stay safe.


  1. I got the d3x - biggest Ripoff ever - paid $13k for it last Jan - you can buy it now at $5-6k lol .. But my first job with it paid for it in full - however if I rented it gor the day then I would now be $13k richer lol.. Haha grr next model - well let's just say the d3x is more then enough camera for me for quite a few years to cOme :-) no more buying cameras.. And NO that nice new 645d is not going to suck me in.. No.. Resist the temptation .. Must resist.. Must!...

  2. Hi rexyinc.
    One issue with modern gear is the depreciation. Still, if it has paid its way then it owes you nothing I guess.
    I know what you mean about the new Pentax 645d too. It is an awful lot of camera for a pretty reasonable price. Still - I too ...must resist, must resist.
    All the best.