27 ms·

The expensive lenses are usually big and heavy. If you don't need that degree of sharpness, then it's potentially a worse tool than a lighter (and cheaper) lens

The expensive lenses are usually big and heavy. If you don't need that degree of sharpness, then it's potentially a worse tool than a lighter (and cheaper) lens. >So why wouldn't they be called "hobbyist photographers" like the rest of us? I feel like I explained my thoughts on that in my previous comment. Basically if you're in it for the love of the gear rather than to make photographs that's fine, but your hobby is collecting rather than photography. Or, to put it another way, photography gear rather than photo-making. >why does it have any importance whatsoever? Sometimes the photo-makers get annoyed at being lumped in with the gear collectors. And a fair number of people get taken in reading the gearhead commentary and end up buying expensive lenses that won't actually help that person take better photos.

kergonath 5y ago
> I feel like I explained my thoughts on that in my previous comment. Yes, you did. Sorry, it shouldn't have sounded so personal. My real problem is with the community in general. > Basically if you're in it for the love of the gear rather than to make photographs that's fine, but your hobby is collecting rather than photography. The thing is, it is a spectrum between pinhole photographers and gear heads. There are different optima for different people along the way, but fundamentally they all do the same thing: taking pictures. So where do you draw the line, and who gets to choose who is branded a legitimate photographer instead of some weirdo with too much money? I have never seen any evidence that "collectors" (in the sense of people who buy modern gear without taking any picture with it; there are plenty of legitimate collectors of old cameras) really are that common, or any more common than soccer moms who buy a camera to collect dust. Every time they are mentioned it is as bogeymen on a photography forum. It is puzzling that a community would show so extreme sentiments towards one of its subsets. And I am a railway modeller, so I am not stranger to strongly opinionated hobbyists. > And a fair number of people get taken in reading the gearhead commentary and end up buying expensive lenses that won't actually help that person take better photos. Sure, that is a problem for some people who are eager to give themselves the right tools and get to overspend. And to be honest most of us are willing to fall into that trap.
- breischl 5y ago
  >it is a spectrum Yeah, for sure, I didn't intend to make it sound like as much of a clear cut dichotomy as I ended up doing. >who is branded a legitimate photographer instead of some weirdo with too much money? You ask the Internet Photography Police to render a verdict, of course! But yeah, it's not a clearcut distinction in most cases.

kergonath 5y ago

> I feel like I explained my thoughts on that in my previous comment. Yes, you did. Sorry, it shouldn't have sounded so personal. My real problem is with the community in general. > Basically if you're in it for the love of the gear rather than to make photographs that's fine, but your hobby is collecting rather than photography. The thing is, it is a spectrum between pinhole photographers and gear heads. There are different optima for different people along the way, but fundamentally they all do the same thing: taking pictures. So where do you draw the line, and who gets to choose who is branded a legitimate photographer instead of some weirdo with too much money? I have never seen any evidence that "collectors" (in the sense of people who buy modern gear without taking any picture with it; there are plenty of legitimate collectors of old cameras) really are that common, or any more common than soccer moms who buy a camera to collect dust. Every time they are mentioned it is as bogeymen on a photography forum. It is puzzling that a community would show so extreme sentiments towards one of its subsets. And I am a railway modeller, so I am not stranger to strongly opinionated hobbyists. > And a fair number of people get taken in reading the gearhead commentary and end up buying expensive lenses that won't actually help that person take better photos. Sure, that is a problem for some people who are eager to give themselves the right tools and get to overspend. And to be honest most of us are willing to fall into that trap.

breischl 5y ago
>it is a spectrum Yeah, for sure, I didn't intend to make it sound like as much of a clear cut dichotomy as I ended up doing. >who is branded a legitimate photographer instead of some weirdo with too much money? You ask the Internet Photography Police to render a verdict, of course! But yeah, it's not a clearcut distinction in most cases.