CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If someone steals your DSLR, be thankful. You are now free to go mirrorless.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

I think if you don't look at what results you want in the pictures you do your approach is wrong, my opinion. Cost is a factor. I will hold back till can get what, I think I want (and save up). I gave good equipment for me. My goals and needs.

NormanTheGr8 Loc: Racine, Wisconsin

I am careful with my gear to the point that I don't abuse it but, it is just a tool and tools are happier when they are being used ! That said I do things to protect it like in the canoe I have a waterproof ammo box that I can access the camera where I could just pop the latch and shoot should I be under attack by Loons or Eagles and Otters.

stu352 Loc: MA/RI Border

As far as my cameras go, if the price has a comma in it, I'm not in the market. My older DSLR with lenses was comma free when new, and my pocket size camera cost less than half that. Both are gently used, never put as risk in rain or dirty environments. OK, I did crush my first pocket sized one in a stupid fall, but I replaced it with the "Mk 2" version of the original, and both together were still under a grand.

Besides, we all know that once you have a camera that can focus sharp enough and control the exposure to you liking, the rest is up to the knowledge and talent of the photographer. I'll be the first to admit that I am not going to take significantly better pictures with a $4500 camera, compared to my economy equipment.

And to the issue of carrying a lumpy boat anchor camera bag around on vacation, I agree. I've done several trips now with just the pocket size camera, and still got some great pictures for my PC wallpaper, the walls at home, and for my do it yourself yearly calendar.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

Not that all pictures are better with a more expensive camera (or lens). In my case it's the durability in weather or surrounding conditions is a factor. I, in some other cases I want to do a larger picture. I still feel the cost is a factor and I will not reach out too far and too often. New is not the word for me.

therwol Loc: USA

Nothing wrong with the pictures. Lugging around a 20 pound bag of equipment as an extra carry-on through multiple airports is a chore. San Francisco, Heathrow, Newcastle, back and forth. Perhaps nothing for a younger person, but when combined with my wife's carry-on and a laptop, it adds up to a workout for an older couple, especially in Heathrow.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Exploring the unknown requires tolerating uncertainty.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Not really, but there are no sandy beaches near here.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

I show concern about theft, but a tool is a tool is a tool. If it was a $5 or $1500 camera or piece of equipment, I would still be upset. But that will not stop me from shooting with that equipment. I try to limit the issues by good choices and then worry only about shooting the shots. If one is worried about theft and/or damage, one can always buy insurance to cover their equipment. If the elements are an issue, one needs to choose equipment that needs their needs. By choosing the right equipment, I eliminated most of my worry about shooting in dust, wind, rain, and snow without additional equipment.

DJon41 Loc: Utah

Ditto on the G7X. Great camera. And light and small. I'm 80 and use a cane so size and weight are paramount.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

Photography is skill an art or a job and all three. The camera is a tool.

lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle

If photography was my only vice, interest, hobby, I could probably afford the most expensive. But like most, I have other interests. That being said, it is a balancing act. Why buy a camera that I can not operate. I have zoom lenses from 10 to 300 mm, a few filters, and a sling bag to carry them. Do I want to lug that around Disney? No. I have a pocket size p&s w/ a 40x zoom for that. It's also great for close focus work. If I was going to tour Scotland or Canada or our national parks, I'd take both. If I was going to Florence (water) or Rome or NYC, I might consider leaving the big stuff in a safer place.

When I bought my first camera, I bought what was comfortable in my hands. I stand by that today. If I feel an area is too dangerous to take my camera, then maybe it's too dangerous for me. Wether it is my big rig, or my pocket rocket, I am careful about where it is at all times. They are always attached to me by wrist or neck strap to protect against dropping or snatching. I guess it comes down to using the correct tool for the job at hand, in which convince can also be one of the those considerations. If I had the most expensive camera and lenses in my possession, I doubt anything would change. Unless the weight just overwhelmed me.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The night is dark and full of terrors.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I don't want or not want the most expensive gear. I think your friend is onto something! I use rugged gear that is weather resistant. My GH4 and Lumix Pro zooms are weather-sealed, and have endured several downpours, unprotected, with no adverse results. In one case, the camera sat on a tripod in the pouring rain for around 20 minutes before I was able to retrieve it. I shook off the water, wiped it dry, and kept on working with it. It still works fine.

My emphasis is on good ergonomics and having functions that are suitable for the things I need cameras to do.

gsmith051 Loc: Fairfield Glade, TN

Not at all. I don’t buy the latest to satisfy the urge to own something new rather it is to enhance my creativity using the camera. If it produces what I want why trade.