Did you think you would spend this much $$$?

[DtheG]

It's all relative. I had to save for a whole year to by my FED3 in 1968. In context that £20 should rate as the most expensive camera I've ever owned. By contrast XA2 and the EOS620 were just disposable income. Two years ago I was thinking —new camera, maybe £300; I looked at the price of the X100 and thought nice but too expensive. But in the end I persuaded myself it would be worth it and besides I owed myself a present,,, etc.
So I've spent more that I thought I would 2 years ago, and an unimaginable amount 40+ years ago, but not that much in real terms. And it's digital so the equivalent of 110 rolls of film in the past 18 months, That much equivalent film! With processing that's far more than the cost of the X100. I would never have used that much film, I would never have used the camera so much.
So not so much "Did you think you would spend this much money?" more I never thought I would take so many pictures.

[gho]

About investing: Investing means to me to put money or effort somewhere given the empirically grounded expectation, that I would get some revenue, be it monetary or otherwise. If I wanted to invest money, I would surely not put it into camera gear. I would rather invest into my future, my family or put the money aside on a bank account. The investment argument is just an excuse in my opinion. I am not sure if anyone got rich by buying camera gear.

About becoming better in photography: I think if one is into photography and not into buying gear or collecting, the best choice is to get a flexible camera system with manual controls. That's it and there is plenty of choice on the market that can be had for very little money or even for free. Quite simple. The rest is practice, reflection, education and research.

About "being done": Ideally professionals are trained in taking pictures with cameras, no matter what. That's basically it. One job may call for an SLR another one for a larger format. Do they hoard tons of equipment in their bedroom that is seldomly or never used? Do they restrict themselves to just one camera and lens? I would say no, because there is always the option to rent or lend something for a specific job. But I guess for most jobs just one body is enough.

Don't get me wrong, some seem to be really enjoying buying, selling and collecting camera gear with no harm done. But some others really seem to be suffering from it, financially and emotionally.

[hteasley]

I think GAS is all about the love of the new (new to you, not new generally, necessarily), and a deep, irrational, optimistic statement that one will in fact live long enough to use all that equipment, and be good enough to equal its capabilities.

My GAS has dropped way off. I've sold many of the cameras I've acquired in the past few years, and a few of the lenses.

[Joosep]

Im a "new kid on the block". I mean that I started when digital started. When I was a teenager, L glass was far from my reach and overpriced. Now when I look at it, its a bargain. I have lost money from almost all the digital stuff I have bought, but I dont regret it, I wouldnt be the person I am without it.

Its a matter of taste.

[thegf]

Originally Posted by gho

It is called GAS (gear acquisition syndrome). It does not only occur with cameras, but with musical instruments also. People seem to be falsely thinking that more expensive equipment will make them better artists. If you are feeling embarrassed, maybe it is a good idea to stop buying gear and to think about why you are doing this. In my experience buying gear is not a substitute for becoming a better photographer. A Hasselblad won't help if your pictures are crap. I mostly stopped posting gear related information because I do not want to fuel GAS in others. Today I am mostly using a Monstar 4000 with a Supramon 1800. You should see the graphic detail.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. One trap, however, that I see a lot of people falling into is the idea that because they use expensive gear, their photos are immediately better. The idea that "shot on [expensive]" camera has a way of elevating their works.

[Pioneer]

Recently I have splurged a bit and picked up some very, very nice equipment. Unfortunately the expensive stuff is sitting on the shelf most of the time and I am still walking around shooting most of my pictures with my IIIc and the Elmar 50 (or my old K1000). The more I can afford, and the more I buy, the more I realize that the simple equipment that I started with actually seems to fit me better than I realized.

Imagine that!

[Richard G]

I have spent far too much, a number of Zeiss lenses new, and second hand. One new Leica purchase only, an M9-P. I bought the X100. I don't regret any of this, but I can't properly justify it. I don't consider any of this an investment as I won't be selling and when my children get hold of all of it they'll either use them or sell them in a falling market is my guess. I justify it partly on account of I have few holidays and next to no air travel compared to my peers, and I don't play golf and have no club memberships. I don't smoke. I drink less and less. I just work.

[kokoshawnuff]

With an up-to-date excel file for my insurance I know exactly how much I've spent on my current gear, and it is way too much. But it brings me happiness and that's what's important to me.

[nikon_sam]

Of all the gear I own only three bodies were brand new in the box and six lenses...two were for my Pentax MX bodies and four for the 4x5 view camera.
Any other gear was all used...I normally don't buy beater or really used stuff...I find the best bang for my buck and am willing to wait for the right deal to come along...
I have the Mamiya m645 system (1000s models) with the 45mm, 55mm, 80mm (1.9) 110mm, 145mm soft focus, 150mm and 210mm...I paid less than $100 for each lens and that includes shipping and all are in excellent + condition...I'm always looking for the best bargains...that's how I can afford the stuff I have right now...you can call me cheap or a frugal shopper...
If I could get what all this gear cost when it was new I'd be a rich man...

[Bill Clark]

"The investment argument is just an excuse in my opinion."

Maybe for you but for me I have made a few coins with photography.

[zvos1]

I get your point about investing but buying good gear like Leica lenses is not spending either, it is buying assets.

To me spending is blowing money on travel, entertainment, whatever but it is not the money I ever expect to get back. It's gone.

If I bought Leica lenses 5 years ago, they would definitely be up in value. However buying lenses with expectation to earn money in future is probably not the best way to get rich LOL, no one does it I hope. But having that asset there in the case you lose a job or something, it is handy that you can always sell it for what you paid for it.

Digital cameras, the whole different story.

Originally Posted by gho

About investing: Investing means to me to put money or effort somewhere given the empirically grounded expectation, that I would get some revenue, be it monetary or otherwise. If I wanted to invest money, I would surely not put it into camera gear. I would rather invest into my future, my family or put the money aside on a bank account. The investment argument is just an excuse in my opinion. I am not sure if anyone got rich by buying camera gear.

About becoming better in photography: I think if one is into photography and not into buying gear or collecting, the best choice is to get a flexible camera system with manual controls. That's it and there is plenty of choice on the market that can be had for very little money or even for free. Quite simple. The rest is practice, reflection, education and research.

About "being done": Ideally professionals are trained in taking pictures with cameras, no matter what. That's basically it. One job may call for an SLR another one for a larger format. Do they hoard tons of equipment in their bedroom that is seldomly or never used? Do they restrict themselves to just one camera and lens? I would say no, because there is always the option to rent or lend something for a specific job. But I guess for most jobs just one body is enough.

Don't get me wrong, some seem to be really enjoying buying, selling and collecting camera gear with no harm done. But some others really seem to be suffering from it, financially and emotionally.

[gho]

Originally Posted by Bill Clark

"The investment argument is just an excuse in my opinion."

Maybe for you but for me I have made a few coins with photography.

Sure buying gear that you need professionally and that is easily paid off by your income is not unreasonable in my opinion. What I had in mind is rationalizing the purchase of expensive camera equipment that will probably never be used just for the sake of GAS.

[gho]

Originally Posted by zvos1

I get your point about investing but buying good gear like Leica lenses is not spending either, it is buying assets.

I get you point too, but I would rather put the money aside. Less hassle. I for myself have stopped buying new gear some time ago and I do not really feel the need to get anything new as using different cameras did not really change anything photographically for me. I do not want to sound preachy or something, do what you like. Maybe I should sell some unused stuff in the classifieds. :-)

[Roger Hicks]

Tens of thousands.

But then, I've earned a lot more from it than I've paid out.

Cheers,

R.

[zvos1]

Originally Posted by gho

I get you point too, but I would rather put the money aside. Less hassle. I for myself have stopped buying new gear some time ago and I do not really feel the need to get anything new as using different cameras did not really change anything photographically for me. I do not want to sound preachy or something, do what you like. Maybe I should sell some unused stuff in the classifieds. :-)

Putting money aside is not fun, LOL!! To be honest I lost too much money buying and selling gear for last 4-5 years. Only pieces of gear i ever made any profit on were leica lenses.
These days I am happy with what I have and rather blow my money on travel. It does more for my photography than any piece of gear.

[Paul Jenkin]

As my dad used to say, "quality pays, it doesn't cost". So long as you're getting the best quality possible and you're using the kit and getting enjoyment from it, then it's money well spent, in my book.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by kokoshawnuff

With an up-to-date excel file for my insurance I know exactly how much I've spent on my current gear, and it is way too much. But it brings me happiness and that's what's important to me.

If that's what's important, why do you need the excel file?

Cheers,

R.

[rbsinto]

In the 33 years that I've been photographing, I have spent a large sum of money on my hobby, but when I consider that the lion's share of my equipment was purchased second-hand, is mostly gear that was released in the 1950s, '60s, 70s, and 1980s, and that it is being used on a constant and on-going basis, I don't have any qualms or regrets about the expenditures.

[hrzlvn]

Originally Posted by msbarnes

haha my justification is that my lenses are an investment

Very good point! Also a good reason that keep persuading myself to invest more!

[thegf]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

If that's what's important, why do you need the excel file?

Cheers,

R.

According to his post, it's for insurance.

[Bob Michaels]

Originally Posted by zvos1

It is not spending, it's investing ...

Remember that the best camera equipment purchases will be the things you love so much that you use them forever or until they have no value left. So your best purchases become your worst investment. And your best investment is that gear that does not work for you so is sold.

[SolaresLarrave]

I've spent a lot... but kept an even larger lot. When I gave the list of my gear to the lady at the insurance company in which we have our home, her eyes opened so wide they didn't fit her face. It's six Leica M bodies, assorted M-lenses (Leica and otherwise), two film Nikon SLRs with a variety of lenses, one dSLR, a couple of P&S and a myriad of valuable accessories. Hecy, I even listed the Leica hoods I had to get for my collapsible lenses!

I don't regret it, however. I'm simply glad that I made all my purchases back in the good ole pre-2008 days of yore !

[denizg7]

when I first started I thought 600 dollars was pricey for a decent lens... in the rangefinder world that's cheap

[ajramirez]

It's all relative. The amount of money I have spent on camera gear in the last four (4) years pales in comparison to the depreciation hit on my car in the same period of time. The car is arguably a necessity (inexistent public transportation where I live), but I have certainly derived much more enjoyment from my photo gear.

[raid]

After getting married, my wife alerted me to the fact that our kids are more important than cameras ...