lovitlots Loc: Tottenham, Ontario, Canada

That's true mostly for the reason that a good quality plane blade held it's edge longer. That goes without saying. But if all he had was a poor quality one he could still get the job done. He have had to sharpen the blade before the job was done and he would have cursed and wined about it but he still would have got it done right. The reason, he realized the limitations and adapted accordingly and when he made money on a few jobs he would have upgraded the plane. Learning the skills is what gave him the opportunity to do that one step at a time.

fotohouse Loc: Northern Illinois

After reading all of the post here I will offer this:

In regards to your friend and his guitar, you can't make music on a crap instrument that does not stay in tune. However not all can make music on the best of instruments (something I decided after several years of trying)

The same can be said of photography to a point. There are just some shots that you can not get with a camera phone. Period. But a Hasseblad does not automatically make you a photographer either. I started with "kit" lenses as I learned the basics, then moved on to good 3rd party fast glass, I have since traded it in for "G" series glass (the Minolta/Sony equivalent for Canon "L" series.)

Did the "G" series glass make me a better photographer? NO, it did however add to the "feel" of the photographs. By that I mean they are sharper with a smoother bokeh and more pleasant color reproductions. Are the images better? YES, but they were good to start with from an exposure/composition/artistic viewpoint.

The most important question is what do you intend to shoot? and with what camera? If you have a stellar high ISO producer you can get away with slower glass to a point if you are shooting wildlife/action that requires a faster shutter or long lenses. But will a f2.8 500 or greater out perform a super zoom? EVERY PIC by virtually every Shooter.

dragon64 Loc: Stewartstown PA

I started out with an inexpensive used 35mm SLR film camera with excellent glass (Zeiss). The quality of the glass offset the less SLR and my pictures were nearly always great. This situation has always infused in me the need for really good glass when purchasing a new camera. The quality or your images can be just the booster you need to help you make the decision to move up to the next level of camera gear and to maintain a high quality level of your lenses.

fotohouse Loc: Northern Illinois

I completely agree, I have always purchased the "7" series camera bodies from Minolta-Sony but mostly for the features they offer over entry level bodies. But for someone new my advice is always to go with entry level bodies and the best glass they can afford. The investment is in the glass NOT the bodies as they get replaced every few years where the glass can last for decades. With this in mind once you buy top glass, the next body can be a step up as your skills increase until you have the highest level body that fits your needs, skill, and style.

amehta Loc: Boston

There is one significant difference with the 35mm film SLR and the DSLR: when you get a DSLR, you're also getting all the film you'll ever be able to use with it. If Velvia, Kodachrome 25, Ektar 125, Ilford HP5, or Kodacolor 1600 aren't "in" the sensor, you'll never be able to shoot with them. With the 35mm SLR, the actual image capture medium was a separate purchase.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Let's put it this way, when you drive @ 8 hours to photograph bears, wolves, eagles or wildlife that you can only get so close to and you are shooting early morning and late at dusk and you see what everyone else is getting with their 400mm. f/2.8, 500mm f/4.0, and 600mm f/4.0, lenses you can wish you had one or be damn glad that you brought one too!!!

Dbez1 Loc: Ford City, PA

I agree! As a retired musician, a $2,000 guitar is not excessive for an ASPIRING musician, (no matter what level he/she is currently) as long as the person can afford it and is dedicated to improving. The same thing with good glass unless the individual has a history of not following through with what he/she starts.

olcoach Loc: Oregon

As Lee Trevino says,"It ain't the fiddle, it's the fiddler".

amehta Loc: Boston

That's just a stupid thing for him of all people to have said, unless there was important context beyond what we can infer. If he wins a tournament by 3 strokes, that's about 1% of the total. The best equipment is always worth at least 1% of the result compared to average equipment.

Photo-Jeff

Sharp, not necessarily more expensive.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

At a family reunion a couple years ago in NY, my cousin, one of the original Taylor employees and now with R. Taylor, the high-end line, completed the sale of a $15k guitar. I think every option had been ordered and the buyer was a paraplegic. At one point Taylor made a series of limited edition guitars made from a particular 100-year-old tree. I can't imaging how much those cost.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Dbez, I always recommend that a person aquire the best glass possible for their situation. Nor would I ever discourage someone from buying the best, most expensive, simply because the want it or can afford that luxery. That is, after all, why some of us work.
I don't know anything about $2000 guitars, but I do know that the most expensive glass will retain most of its full value when sold years later, and in many instances be worth more than one had originally paid for it. And for that reason, I always feel that the best glass is always worth what we are comfortable spending on it. It's mostly a matter of priorities. Often people drive a very expensive car but spend only a minimul amount on their camera gear. The lenses are an investment, the car is literally, how much are you willing to throw away, again, it's just priorities.
That ultra expensive Canon 200-400 that everybody keeps mentioning, I can almost guarantee, if you sell it 10 years later, you will have rented it for free, if not actually made money!
So when is it practical to buy expensive glass?
Always, if you can afford it. ;-)
SS

jimni2001 Loc: Sierra Vista, Arizona, USA

I bet Lee never bought his clubs from Walmart.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

pretty much... Check out this several page discussion thread on Flickr, all images posted to this particular thread were shot with lenses costing less than $300 and there are some amazing images.. What is between your two ears is your most important asset, no matter how much you spend on your equipment you will not improve your photography until you improve your skill level.. which is a whole different conversation..

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canondslr/discuss/72157624623729878/page4/

amehta Loc: Boston

Excellent point: expensive does not mean quality, and even when they are related, it isn't a straight line.