3) Would it be more cost effective to rent/barrow for specific occasions, or should this equipment be a mainstay in my arsenal of tools?

We read about sports photographer Bill Frakes owning 29 Nikon D3 bodies and National Geographic photographer Joe McNally lighting the X – 47A Pegasus with 12 Nikon SB-80s. Only if we all could have that many cameras and lights; imagine the variety of images we could produce. But if we are honest with ourselves as photographers, the majority of our photographic endeavors revolve around a small and specific set of equipment. While a product photographers necessary equipment list may be larger then a wedding photographer, each should know their essential equipment list. This list comprises of the tools that, on the average job, will be used 80-90% of the time. As for the 10-20% of the occasions when there are specific equipment requirements, go rent it. How often would you be using 12 Nikon SB-80s (or whatever your equivalent is) anyways?

Fin

This is the end of the series ‘When should I upgrade?’ I hope that I provided some food for thought based off my experiences. If one bit of wisdom could be gained by this series, I wish it to be this: Go photograph something and forget about the technical mumbo-jumbo. Take pictures with your “inferior” camera; by default you will have more and better pictures then the person spending hours not capturing images and fretting over technical specification of the latest equipment.

Grace and Peace

2) Will I potentially loose at least 2-3x more if I don’t make this investment?

This can be a “gray” area question, and therefore, needs a bit critical thought.  Potential future profit shouldn’t be confused with present potential loss. There isn’t any money to be lost if it hasn’t been gained.  So this question of loss shouldn’t have correlating thoughts of, “if I don’t buy this camera, then I will loose the $35,000 that I know will be profited this year.  This question pertains more to the present or near future business liability and insurance losses, the “cover your butt” type of losses.  On a basic level this means having backup equipment (bodies, lenses, memory cards,  batteries, etc.) for assignments in case of those unfortunate situations of equipment of failures. Trust me, as I have had more then my share; failures will happen to every photographer on some level. On a more complex level this means maintaining your business and professional reputation.

Dreadful real life example of when I didn’t ask myself this question:
Back in the day, I followed the advice from the pros about backing up my files.  I had a 320 GB primary hard drive and a 250 GB secondary backup hard drive.  A couple days before I had session with a client, the 250 GB capacity maxed out.  I didn’t think much of it other then buying another drive when I had the chance.  The photo shoot arrives, it one of those ‘only get one chance’ type as there wouldn’t be any rescheduling for a re-shoot.    The session went well and I upload the pictures to my 320 GB drive without being able to the backup on full secondary drive.

Fast forward a few days later, I open up Bridge in Photoshop  to continue processing the photos. Photos not there.  Drive not reading.  Heart not beating.  My 320 GB drive died.  So frantically, with unstable emotions and thoughts of my business crumbling,  I scoured Google for hard drive recovery services. After researching and calling several companies, I picked one that I felt most “comfortable” with.  A terrifying week later I receive a call from the recovery disk doctors with great news, 93-96% percent of the drive was recovered (only one file from the shoot was corrupt) and my business wouldn‘t crumble.  Bad news, it would cost two grand worth of labor and service.  Ouch.  Hard lesson in the cost of doing business.

Had I made it a priority and purchased a $100-200 replacement hard drive the day it maxed out, I would have saved myself 10-20x in recovery costs.  It was a hard but important lesson,  I was naïve  with a thoughts of “what could possibly happen in the next couple of days.”  Today, I have 6 hard drives, I don’t fool around.  So do yourself a favor and ask yourself, “will I potentially loose at least 2-3x more if I don’t make this  investment?”

Grace and Peace

More expensive, higher mega-pixels, bigger sensor, quicker frames-per-second is always better, right? I will argue that when considering the best photographic “upgrades,” equipment that seems lacking technically may be the most appropriate.

From roughly the 1890’s to about the 1950’s, large and medium format cameras were the mainstay of photographers. Names such as Ansel Adams and Richard Avedon deployed these cameras in and out of the studio. The common 8×10 inches, 4×5 inches, and 120 format films provided an enormous amount of information and detail which allowed for large, occasional life-sized, tack sharp prints. But while these film types and cameras rendered superior quality, they were clumsy, large, heavy, and slow to deploy. These characteristics made for capturing spontaneous and fleeting moments almost impossible to photograph without much forethought and preparation. But during the 1920’s-1930’s, a new line of cameras and a French photographer were dedicated to capturing the “decisive moment.”

Although the 35mm film was in use before the now legendary Leica cameras, it was the Leica that popularized it. While the Leica’s optics and quality made it suitable for professionals, its compact size made it easy to carry and deploy (“point and shoot” if I might say). This quick fire camera was ideal for master photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson who desired to capture the what he called the “decisive moment.” Cartier-Bresson, with his Leica and 50mm lens, has been credited with creating what many photographers refer to today as “street photography.” Prowling and stalking the streets, he would search for interesting moments while maintaining supreme composition. One of his greatest images, “Behind the Gare St. Lazare,” which depicts a Frenchman jumping over/into a large puddle of water, was taken through a gap in the fence. Imagine attempting to capture that spontaneous moment with a large or medium format camera. For Cartier-Bresson, the 35mm Leica with a smaller negative format, made it possible to photograph his many iconic images.

“For us the camera is a tool, the extension of our eye, not a pretty little mechanical toy. It is sufficient that we should feel at ease with the camera best adapted for our purpose. Adjustments of the camera – such as setting the aperture and the speed – should become reflexes, like changing gear in a car. The real problem is one of intelligence and sensitivity.”

-Henri Cartier-Bresson

Now I understand that digital sensors are a newer technology which have quickly evolved, making the “lacking” 3 mega-pixel sensors obsolete. But with the average consumer point and shoot camera floating at 10 mega-pixels, is being able to print solid 4×6 and 5×7 prints a concern? How often does the average photographer print over 5×7 or even print at all? Does even a 10 mega-pixel sensor matter if the pictures are to be uploaded to Flickr at 600×400 pixels (which by the way isn‘t even equivalent to 1 mega-pixel)? So let us forget about mega-pixels and focus on the other technical limitations of the camera.

We need to remember that photographers create photographs. This seems obvious, but often when it come to equipment, we tend to be collectors of “toys“ rather than creators with “tools.” All photography equipment contains weaknesses, so is imperative that we consider the technical limitation of every piece of equipment and choose the most appropriate piece for our purpose just as Henri Cartier-Bresson did with his 35mm Leica and 50mm lens. Sometimes this will mean purchasing relatively less capable equipment that better suit’s a given photographic situation. So as I opened, when considering the best photographic “upgrades,” equipment which seems lacking technically may be the most appropriate. If your current equipment is appropriate and changing settings has become an extension of your arms, then “feel at ease” and don’t upgrade. Go capture those “decisive moments” until that camera breaks, then upgrade.

“Photography has not changed since its origin except in its technical aspects, which for me are not important.”
- Henri Cartier-Bresson

Grace and Peace

Knowledge

Equipment in and of itself will not make anyone a better photographer or for that matter a compelling photograph. “Compelling” begins to form when the photographer uses his skill and knowledge of photographic principles to compose and direct an image.

When I’m ready to make a photograph, I think I quite obviously see in my mind’s eye something that is not literally there in the true meaning of the word. I’m interested in something which is built up from within, rather than just extracted from without.

-Ansel Adams

Are you “just extract[ing] from without?” Why spend thousands of dollars on a pro camera which will be parked in automatic mode? Those expensive pro cameras have never included a “compelling” button for adjusting the lighting, composition, color, and emotion to create the perfect image. It will, however, provide similar results to that of an entry level D-SLR or compact camera’s auto feature. So realize that you, the photographer, adjusts and constructs lighting, shifts the composition, dictates color tones, and captures emotion. The camera and photography equipment are just tools to provide the means to an end product of the image that you, the photographer, create.

Bad metaphor alert:
Why buy an Indy 500 race car only to drive in rush hour traffic on I95? To pick up the ladies, of course! Although with only one seat in that Indy car, I doubt there will be any “picking up.” Same goes for photography equipment; it might get the attention of clients (”ladies”) and could possibly put a couple of clients in front of your camera, but that “Indy car” attention wears off quickly when your images have only “one seat” and aren’t compelling.

So if you “…see in [your] mind’s eye something that is not literally there…” and you have the skill and knowledge to build it “up from within” and portray that vision, then it might be worth your money to invest in new and/or better equipment. If, with your current equipment, your vision does not equate to that which was captured on the camera, then spend your money improving your photography by taking classes, workshops, reading books, researching the internet, and, most of all, practicing before you upgrade. Once your vision is equal to the images produced on the camera, then consider upgrading your photography equipment.

Grace and Peace.