selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

You can't look at it from a single viewpoint and cover all of the important considerations.

Upgrading to a "better" camera might include moving to a larger format, a more durable camera, a camera with more lens choices, a wider range of ISO, better noise control, easier handling, quieter, ... we could go on.

Your list of objectives will be different from mine. So what? If we agreed about everything, one of us would be redundant.

BebuLamar

These days redundancy is important Scotty like 2 card slots.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

If you're keeping track of that kind of specific data (people offended = same people who upgrade), then you spend even more time on UHH than I do

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

And the list goes on ...

Linda S.

That is true for me as well! Had Canon's 5DM3. Purchased the M4. I am an amateur photographer. Really liked the touch screen, Live View and more pixels. Like the pixels, not for printing very large prints but for the ability to crop! Sometimes I see something I like, can't get close enough, decide how I will crop it during post-processing, then adjust the camera's position to be able to achieve my goal for that particular shot.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Two basic patterns I see, Bebulamar:

1) Technology has made the new gear able to do things the old gear couldn’t do - better low light performance, faster burst speed, and on and on. Many wait until they actually want to do something their old camera isn’t good at before they buy.

2) They WANT new stuff - whether they believe it will improve their work or they just like to have the latest and greatest gear and features.

I’m in the first camp.
Andy

srt101fan

Non-serious answer: Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS)

More serious response:

The word "upgrade" as frequently used on UHH is troublesome. To some "upgrading" means getting something "better", another troublesome word (I agree, Linda, it needs definition!).

"Upgrading", and "getting a camera you can grow into", are concepts that imply that the path to becoming a better photographer has to include multiple hardware changes along the way. That ain't necessarily so. IT ALL DEPENDS....

Random thoughts: If I go from my Nikon D5300 to my seldom used Leica IIIc, is that an upgrade or a downgrade? Is the IIIc a better camera? Can you consider a camera you can't afford an upgrade? You replace your lowly, "entry-level" (Oh, my God, you shoot with one of those?) cameras with a "high-end" body and adapt 1970's Vivitar zoom lenses to it, is that an upgrade? You're happy with your crop-sensor camera and kit lenses and someone talks you into a full-frame camera and long lens that you're not comfortable carrying, is that an upgrade?

Maybe I'm getting carried away with this, but I see too many UHH poster recommendations for buying "more" and "better" without any concern for an OPs actual question, background, interests, goals, etc.

We ain't all on the steps of a ladder to professionalism!!!

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Great post! With experience comes wisdom.

Andy

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

When my daughter started Cello lessons her teacher played her student cello and it sounded wonderful! I asked her why a professional grade Cello when this one sounded so good. She said that it takes a lot more work to get the sound. I would submit that the same is true with cameras. - Dave

BebuLamar

I used the term upgrade because it was used here often. A lot of times it means just update from an old model to the new model of the same class. Sometimes it up a class but generally nothing like from 35mm to medium format. Or digital to film or film to digital. People going from film to digital a lot but they don't call it upgrade though.

But in general when I make the original post I was thinking of upgrade as those who buy a new camera to replace their existing camera which is still perfectly good and the new camera offers just more of the same thing not a lot of different from the old camera.

srt101fan

Thanks Andy!

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

It's true that a great photographer can make great photographs with any camera, partly because he will know to work within the capabilities of whatever camera he uses. But the more capabilities a camera has, the more situations he can make great photos in. Things like higher quality sensors, improved dynamic range and high ISO performance, and sophisticated focusing and exposure controls will make it easier to shoot in situations like fast action in low light, or very contrasty lighting, or making large prints that stand up to close examination.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

I sold my two favorite chevy's to my son and a buddy, wish I still had them - 1972 Chevelle Malibu, 383 Hi-PO Stroker Motor, Full Edlebrock top end, Hi-stall kitted Turbo-hydromatic, Heat Wrapped full headers, Posi-rear, full riser SS hood w/cold air intake, completely redone in and out by me in the back yard barn - white with black SS treatment - take no prisoners!! 1978 Blazer, 350 Hi-Po crate engine, 35" BFG's, restored by yours truly - off-road mudslinger, and right respectable street truck! They were a lot of work, but so worth it!!!


My apologies for continuing the hi-jack.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Most responses so far address how the question affects the poster personally or make the general observation about G.A.S. (which was kind of the point of my "joke" on page 1)

srt101fan, your thoughtful comments speak to what we say to others, and it is important to make that distinction IMO.

I tirelessly promoted the Canon SX50 bridge camera for two or three years as a viable alternative to the oft-praised heavy and expensive gear being recommended to hobbyists interested in shooting distant wildlife.

Often we don't know an OP's experience and abilities - in fact, am I the only one who thinks it's weird that someone will take the time to create a UHH account and to learn how to navigate the site in order to post a single question? Anyway, I suspect the observations about recommending to other people wasn't part of the original intent of the question, but then neither was my "what's important in an image and what isn't" lecture

Shutterbug57

I replace cars when it becomes more economical to buy a new car than keep fixing the old one. This is usually between 250K & 300K miles. Or, obviously, if there is a safety defect that rears it’s ugly head.

In the digital world, I have replaced cameras when there is a technological reason, as follows:

Fuji all in one to D70s because I was shooting action and the shutter lag was killing me. The D70s was like going back to film with the real time shutter.

D70s to D200 because the extra 4MP (6MP to 10 MP) was meaningful. I was shooting field sports and having a bit more MP to crop was a big help in final IQ.

D200 to D500 because shooting night HS field sports or in poorly lit gyms, the D200 is a marginal tool. Going above 800 ISO, while it will do 3200, gets very noisy very fast and if you miss the exposure my even a tiny bit, things get worse. The D500 will comfortably shoot 4-6 stops faster than the D200 allowing you to get much better IQ in the process.

Fuji X-T2 - didn’t replace anything, but I travel for work a good bit and I wanted a small, light kit I could get good image quality with. The X-T2, a 18-55 & 55-200 slip right in my briefcase without an issue and I get great shots. This one is like having a motorcycle to pair with your car (D500).