aellman Loc: Boston MA

Good for you! The manufacturers keep introducing new models to bamboozle a certain group of consumers that they MUST have the new one, even though the differences from the last model are inconsequential. (You know who you are.) And it works! The biggest scam ever perpetrated by the manufacturers is convincing thousands of photographers that they ABSOLUTELY MUST HAVE full frame. "What fools these mortals be." >Alan

Robert1 Loc: Davie, FL

Did manufacturers convince photographers to switch to 6x4.5, 6x7, 8x10, etc.?
No one convince anyone. Manufacturers advertise and sell their wares. They give rave reviews of their wares to entice you to buy, but you make the decision, as to what you want, need, or want to think you need.

In photography, the various formats that exist, were they conceived to scam you? To make you believe that each format is the one and only? To bamboozle you as you put it? I don't think so.

The photography market is a very competitive one, where you are left behind as a business if you do not produce equipment that attracts buyers. These days even more so, due to the declining market and profits as the newer generations are more and more inclined to prodigiously produce images with their cellphones, and see no use for a camera.

In reality camera manufacturers would love that each and every photographer, would get medium format camera systems, so that their profit margin would increase, not FF cameras, but we all know that very few can afford that; Mostly for business's needs.

So, in your opinion, people that are into the photography hobby should only get: what format? So that you are not bamboozle.

dukepresley

As RichardTaylor said on the first page, "If you can afford it - it doesn't really matter.." My first Nikon was a point & shoot I got as a present and I subsequently went from that to a D50 and now, some 20 years later, got a D750 during the Christmas sale. Never regretted any of the upgrades, nor the lenses necessary to accompany the cameras.

Bill_de Loc: US

Matt Granger has an interesting video on the subject that you might enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQckSsE0dSg

--

ekfelton Loc: Michigan

It’s a personal choice. Leave it at that!

kcaaron

For better or for worst...only your equipment...not your wife! hahaha

aellman Loc: Boston MA

------------------

The Kodak Instamatic has been greatly underrated. Seriously, I have no argument with your position. Well taken. The problem I see is a morphing of the craft into rank consumerism. A good friend, who has never gone beyond a snapshot, wants to get onto photography. So he bought a full frame camera and a couple of lenses for an investment of about $6000. We met a few weeks later so he could show me his new stuff. He said "This is a wide angle lens. What does that mean and what do I do with it?" I suggested he look online for examples of wide angle images to see the unique characteristics of that type of lens, and that I could show him in person when we took out his equipment for a "test drive."

My opinion refers to the many members who ask the question, "Should I upgrade?" We see it all the time. Most of those people appear to be talking about technical capability. They're afraid they don't have adequate hardware support for the photography they want to do. However, in many cases, if they have to ask that question, from a purely technical point of view, the answer is probably "no."

But, as I said, your point is well taken. My opinion reflects my personality, photographic and life experience, and financial status. Upgrading is a personal decision. If you have the most expensive model of BMW sedan, do you need to upgrade? Maybe; there's always something "better" and more expensive. For myself, I avoid being drawn in by "the next shiny thing, but thats' because of my personality and the fact that my 9 year old Sony DSLRs have every technical capability I need. On the other hand, if an expensive upgrade is what makes a person happy, s/he should go for it.

Alan

tropics68 Loc: Georgia

Agreed. I bought a Canon 100-400L II last summer. $1900 bucks. I soon realized I really did not have the use for it I thought I might. So I thought I might sell it or trade it in on something I would use.

I contacted three of the most popular, reputable companies that advertise they buy used gear, one of which was the outfit I bought it from new. I am not mentioning any names.

What a shock! Here I had a $1900 lens that gets great reviews and that I had only owned about four months and maybe had a 100 clicks on it, in pristine condition and the BEST offer I got was $900.00.

I knew that I would probably take a beating but the word beating is far to kind. I put it up on ebay and it was gone the second day for $1,500.

My advice is, before deciding to "UP Grade" please make darn sure you really want to trade your old gear in. If you are wishing to get rid of used gear you are waaay better off selling direct. Convenience is very, very costly.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

The general rue for not only photographic gear, but any product, is that when "used" it is worth about half what it was new. There are exceptions, but that is the common situation. An inconvenient truth. >Alan

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Fair points... We are all a little bit too consumer driven.

Personally, I concentrate on assembling outfits that meet my needs and satisfy my expectations for adequate IQ. My wife and I have recently "completed" our shared digital outfit. We started with a D-50 body and kit lenses, upgrading each lens to the point where we each have a relatively full range of focal lengths and specialty lenses. She carries a Sigma 18-300 as her walkaround, I have a Nikkor 18-70 for the same purpose. I have a Nikon 70-300 as well, and a Sigma 10-20. She has a Nikkor macro prime and Rokinon fisheye. We both have 50 mm Nikon 1.8 primes and Yongnuo flashes, as well as decent tripods. We've gone from the D50 to D3200 and now D7100. I think we're where we need to be, and I have no active plans to acquire more digital stuff so long as ours still functions. That's right where I like to be. We may upgrade a lens or two in the future, and maybe add a high speed prime if we find the right focal length. I don't think there will be a Nikon body in APS size in the future that will produce a significant upgrade, and I don't see us moving to FF - replacing all those focal lengths in full frame is beyond the resources we allocate to this hobby. I'd rather save my money for travel, printing, and other non-gear things.

My film outfits will be top priority for any gear acquisition for a while. They include 4x5, 35mm, and medium format outfits, which I still enjoy shooting with. Film Is Not Dead, as they say....

I've kept almost all of my old film gear, but the digital bodies and lenses we've outgrown have been either given away or are stored in our house as backups should something break. I've never "traded in" a single piece of gear in my life; it's never worth it, as ChrisT pointed out in the OP.

Just my gear strategy - it works for me.

Andy

aellman Loc: Boston MA

In many cases, it's advisable to keep the old gear as a backup. >Alan

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Since I usually have the 18-300 on my 80D, it usually covers all I expect to encounter. I do have a Tamron 150-600 G2 for longer shots and a Tokina Pro 11-20 f/2.8 for wider ones. They often go on the T2i along with the 80D and its lens. For now, those 3 lenses do it for me. I can see where technology will improve camera bodies, so I expect there will be another in my future, but not now.

You have many more camera bodies than I can see the need for, I make do with 2 DSLRs, one pocket camera and one mega-zoom. This in a span of 14 years for digital. My 1st was a Rebel EOS XT which I no longer have.

Robert1 Loc: Davie, FL

OK. You explanation here makes sense now. I cannot desagree with it. It's a pretty common phenomenon in a consumerism society; regardless of actual need or not, too many people want the latest/greatest that they can get (even if they can't, they do).

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

The one we just lost was a Toy Poodle which didn't shed and needed regular grooming. This was one my wife chose while I was living 1000 miles away. I had, until about 2 years ago, a short haired mixed breed that shed. Oh! How it shed! Before that my wife had another Toy Poodle and I had a Cocker Spaniel, both needing regular grooming.

Like photography, they were worth all we spent on them, and more.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

Thanks. That's what is meant by "the next shiny thing."