turp77 Loc: Connecticut, Plainfield

I totally agree with you to a point. Use your camera to the extent of its capabilities. I look back at some of my Fuji bridge cameras and my D70s,D300s, D3 and now my D810 prints and You can’t tell which Camera took which picture by just looking. I know which one because I took them but to someone not knowing can’t tell the difference. But as the new cameras emerge they can do more allowing more photo opportunities you didn’t have before. The more MP enables larger prints or higher quality in blowing up and cropping a small portion of a photo. One last thing is the build. My poor D3 looks like it went through a war and is still fully functional with over 580,000 actuations.

Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC

Very well said, especially "My enjoyment has been and is over the top." Someone else here wrote that it's about how quickly one camera or another can adapt to a given situation, within their capabilities, of course. I am reminded about some truly stunning photos by one of the masters here using a small mirrorless, probably set on auto something, where a DSLR simply could not go. These photos are much more a reflection of the photographer and less so the camera. On the amateur side, a Kodak Retina allowed me to get photos where I could never take my Nikon F. Like you, my money goes to other things mostly for my family and some to other hobbies that are a bit costlier. The only reason I finally needed a DSLR was for the live HDMI output. Until then, my smaller sensor bridge cameras are usually been adequate for my needs. Though I enjoy getting back to shallow DOF and a few other things that I just can't do with non-detachable lenses in smaller formats, it will take a lot more practice before I can say I am better than any of my modest cameras given my goals as a still life amateur. Whatever the cost and range of our equipment, we all share the satisfaction of learning and improving our skills at whatever pace suits our lives. I am also glad that pros, given their time constraints, and amateurs can mix here.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

I also use entry level equipment. I can't justify spending too much money on equipment. That being said, I have never encountered a situation where I was not able to capture the photo I wanted. I print my work and I challenge anyone to determine whether it was taken with a D850 or a D3200.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

I agree 100%. My equipment is old and was bought cheap, but it does everything I need to do.
In addition, some of my best work had been done with the iPhone 5s and SE, and the Diana Toy Camera.

Old Saybrook, CT. Dusk. Diana Toy Camera

tnturk Loc: Gallatin Tennessee

Well in the end there are two camps. Some gotta have the newest because they will get better? Did the camera physically make them better? Whisper in your ear? Point out that "oh my" moment? No that new technology didn't make you better. It allowed you to capture that moment in a better way. Only you can make you better.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

How could I possible argue with you! You are 100% right. Cameras and lenses are only tools, some tools better than others but tools nonetheless. If you cannot turn out a great photograph with an entry camera and a kit lens do not expect that a professional lens and camera will make you better. It simply will not happen.
Learning basic photography has always been my first advise to those willing to improve on their art. Practice makes perfect.
Good gear usually has the improvements that can make our photography easier but that does not mean we cannot do any better with lesser gear.
A good camera and lens matter but always in the hands of the experienced photographer.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Please do not fool yourself,

Once you have the knowledge/experience THEN the equipment WILL Make you better ......

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

<<So for all you people out there who think the equipment will make you better. Nope it's practice, read, understand. That's what makes you better.>>

So Ansel Adams would have produced photos with a Brownie Hawkeye as good as those with his 8X10 view camera? The above is a commonly expressed opinion on this forum and when stated without qualification is excessive and inaccurate. I'm using an extreme example to make the point that equipment can be important to get the quality of photos that the photographer wants. That seems so obvious I don't know how it can be argued that the skill and knowledge of the photographer is the ONLY thing that matters. BOTH the quality of the equipment and the quality of the photographers skill and knowledge are important. Better equipment can mean better photos although admittedly it doesn't guarantee it.

flyguy Loc: Las Cruces, New Mexico

All so true, there is no disputing all of this in my mind.

tnturk Loc: Gallatin Tennessee

Well said

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

👍

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

A Lesser Photographer

"If you can't say what you need to say in a photograph without heaping layers of software or resorting to the latest trends in post processing, you're probably not saying much of anything."

-C.J. Chilvers

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

And how much low light, fast action photography do you do? Do you ever encounter that situation?

jtrebes

I agree with your comments but I've found as I practice my mind is expanding and wanting to do new things. My existing equipment may be limiting me to move to the next level. This is different than buying the next great thing just because I want it. What I'm trying to say is let your equipment grow (if financially possible) with you new skills and imagination. Also nice picture.