Let me start this out by saying I don’t want this to simply be another “gear doesn’t matter… just practice” post. I want to, more specifically, answer a question about why the pros always say “Gear doesn’t matter”, yet they are the ones always shooting the best gear right? It seems contradictory to may people.
Just the other week, I had some one ask an interesting question and I thought I’d share my answer here because it’s an answer I don’t hear enough about. Because constantly saying “Gear doesn’t matter” doesn’t really help anyone. You’re smart enough to realize that that isn’t totally true right? And once you read this, hopefully you’ll understand that maybe gear does matter… sometimes… but sometimes not:
Gear Doesn’t Matter?
The question I received went something like…
Hi Matt… you had mentioned in a video that a digital camera less than 4 years old could take amazing photos. Then near the end of the video you said what camera you use now, and it is one of the higher end ones. So if you use a very expensive camera, then why? If the cheap ones can do just as good as your multi-thousand dollar one, why would you spend your hard earned cash on that expensive one, if you didn’t need it to take great photos. The words out of the mouths of the pros just does not match where they put their money. How come?
The Answer
It’s a fair question, so I thought I’d write more about it here. Here’s what I wrote back:
Hi. Here’s an analogy. What would a pro golfer say to you if you asked them why they use expensive clubs and why not cheaper ones?
If you gave a pro golfer a cheap set of Walmart clubs from 10 years ago, they would go out and still play an amazing round of golf right? Probably better than any one of us reading this would play.
Would they have their best round? Probably not. These less expensive, older clubs are less forgiving. So if you don’t hit directly on the “sweet spot” of the club head, the ball goes off course more than with an expensive club. They’re not made of the good materials, so they probably won’t have the same distance and accuracy either. And what about golf balls. They’re not all created equal. Expensive ones fly better, spin better, and have better “feel” than cheaper ones.
So… while that pro can go out and play with the cheapest set of Walmart clubs, do they do it when they’re about to play an important tournament? Of course not. They realize that they can stack the deck in their favor by using better gear. They realize that their percentage of good shots vs bad ones is better with better gear. (let’s refer to this as the keeper rate)
Let’s bring this back to photography. Can a pro photographer take a photo with a less expensive camera? Of course. Will they get as many keepers, have the same focal length reach, and have the same responsiveness in auto focus, customization, etc… ? Nope!
I never said “you can do just as good” with a lesser camera/lens. I said you can still make great / amazing photos. And that is 100% true. But with better gear, in certain genres of photography, you can do better – which is why you see people (that really want the best quality photo and chances of getting that photo) invest in some of that better gear if they can afford it.
The 80 / 20 Rule
Put simply, their keeper rate and quality of photos increases with this better gear. The vast majority of a good photo still comes from behind the camera. I person I follow (Steve Perry) refers to this as the 80/20 rule.
80% of the greatness of a photo comes from the person taking the photo. 20% comes from gear. I like that analogy because it recognizes that 20% of photography is indeed about the gear. Anyone that says “gear doesn’t matter” isn’t lying to you. They’re just not filling in the rest of the story.
The Rest of the Story?
You’ve all heard the analogies that go something like:
“Your cooking is amazing… you must have great pots and pans”
“Your paintings are beautiful… you must have great brushes”
The truth is, the chef does have great pots and pans. The painter does have the top of the line brushes to work with. They won’t argue that gear doesn’t matter, because they know that in some ways that equipment does matter when used in the right hands. IF some one says to me, “Wow your camera takes great photos!”, I would answer “Yep it does and I would never want to give it up”. There’s nothing wrong with the fact that gear matters… it matters in every aspect of any hobby and profession out there.
There is a But…
For some people, they have yet to reach that level of proficiency where they’ve max’d out on the 80% part. So adding better gear doesn’t always help. But for some one that is at the level of maxing out that 80% part, better gear gives you more keepers and better results. That’s because you’ve already pushed the 80% part (the person taking the photo) to its max so now you’re upping your chances by improving the 20% part.
You very rarely hear me say gear doesn’t matter. I’ve always been of the mindset that gear doesn’t matter, until it matters… and sometimes it does matter. If you take the same level photographer, who gets themselves in to great light, with an amazing subject, and amazing everything, and give them a lesser camera vs a better one, they will generally make a better photo with the better gear.
The problem is that for most people that ask me about why their gear isn’t performing the way they want, most of the time the gear wasn’t the problem. It was the photographer and the subject they chose to put themselves in front of, the light they chose to photograph it in, and the skills (or lack of) that they used in taking the photo.
Self Awareness
Hopefully that helps shed some light on a very popular topic and question. In the end, I think this boils down to improving your self awareness. It’s something every person reading this (including me) can always be better at. You have to objectively look at the situation and think “am I doing the VERY best in every other area but gear”.
Am I putting myself in front of an AMAZING subject? Am I putting myself in front of that subject in AMAZING light? Do I know my camera so well that I can adapt to the changing circumstances instantly without even thinking about it? Am I being patient enough in finding that amazing shot because I should NOT expect that they just happen? If you answer no to any of those questions while you’re out shooting, then there is a really good chance that gear won’t matter. You may up your keeper rate, but if your keepers are all not following the guidelines above, that won’t matter much will it?
Again, it’s about self awareness. I saw a question recently that started off with “Hi… I’m a VERY advanced photographer….” (yes, very was capitalized). They proceeded to ask a question about something. So out of curiosity I looked up their website. But all I can say is that there was not ONE photo on their site that said “Great!” to me. I suppose they were technically correct in most cases. But when some one says they’re “VERY advanced” I expect a level of proficiency in all areas. And based on the question they asked, their photography was not at that level. That is a person, unfortunately, lacking in self awareness.
So, the next time you’re wondering why people keep saying “Gear doesn’t matter”, and there they are shooting $10,000 worth of photo equipment, hopefully this helps frame that statement a little better and gives you a little ammo to look at yourself and figure out if gear does or doesn’t matter for your photography. Thanks!
I love teaching and photography... In that order. I feel that enjoying photography, and photo editing can get WAY too complicated. So my personal mission (and favorite thing to do), is to create education that simplifies the process of taking great photos, and how to edit them to get the results you’ve always wanted.
I agree with the old 80/20 analogy in almost every photo op with one MAJOR exception. Action photography. I’ve been an sports shooter for more than 50 yrs and before autofocus became the norm, it required great skill and experience to shoot fast action sports. Pre focusing on the location of the expected action using small aperture (“f8 and be there” as Weegie said) was commonly employed. The keeper rate manually focusing an SLR lens was a fraction of the rate using even the an early AF body. With today’s incredible top of the line DSLR’s, (or even older and/or less sophisticated AF bodies) almost anyone can nail sharp images. In fact, even older and/or less sophisticated AF bodies will yield more tack sharp pics than manually focusing.
Of course the same comment applies to most high action photography like birding, especially birds in flight. Manually focusing on a flitting bird was not conducive to a high keeper rate. I could do it with a slowly circling large raptor perhaps, but a small, unpredictable small bird? Think hummingbird or any warbler.
So yes, for most photography, the photog behind the camera is critical . But for high speed action, I’d say the 80/20 rule becomes more like 40/60 for an experienced action shooter and perhaps 20/80 for a newbie.
Oh! And let’s not forget how auto metering impacted photography. With my Nikon 400/2.8 on my D5 on “P” mode set to continuous focus at high frame/sec, even a rank amateur would have to try really hard to get a poorly exposed and poorly focused image.
I’ve used your golf analogy many times. You could give me Tiger Wood’s clubs and it doesn’t mean I’d shoot par.
Likewise, I could give a beginner my camera and it won’t enable them to take amazing photos.
The 80/20 rule is as old as moses.
Yes it is. However, I don’t often hear people actually come out and say that 20% is the gear and that it is indeed important. Most people try to say gear isn’t important which is why I thought this analogy to the 80/20 rule was impactful. Thanks.
I think it was Lee Trevino that once said: “ It ain’t the arrows, it’s the Indian”.
Same goes for photography.
As always, thanks for all your great advice.
Interesting quote. I guess I was saying the opposite though… that sometimes it is about the “arrows” 🙂
I totally agree on the 20/80 ratio.
Nevertheless, I love this quote:
When Jack London had his portrait made by the noted San Francisco photographer Arnold Genthe, London began the encounter with effusive praise for the photographic art of his friend and fellow bohemian, Genthe. “you must have a wonderful camera…It must be the best camera in the world…You must show me your camera.” Genthe then used his standard studio camera to make what has since become a classic picture of Jack London. When the sitting was finished, Genthe could not contain himself: “I have read your books, Jack, and I think they are important works of art. You must have a wonderful typewriter.”
Thanks for the thoughts. That’s a very common analogy and some one made it in the comments here as well. But I was trying not to say the same old thing that everyone says. People make the analogy with a cook’s pots and pans, artist brushes, etc… I guess, for me, it’s not really what I was trying to get across in this post. I was actually trying to get across that gear does matter in many cases. If some one were to see my photos on the wall and said “Wow… you must have a great camera”, I would reply that yes I do. And that camera allows me to get photos that I wouldn’t be able to get with other cameras… when I add practice and experience in to the mix. Hope that makes sense.
I am have been working for the last 3 years to reach that 80%…and at the same time wishing the other 20% comes along…
I started following Steve Perry even before I knew Matt was into bird photography, and let me just say… You both have been the best….thank you!…
To progress to the 80% level of competency be advised by this from Henry David Thoreau: “It’s not what you look at that matters, it’s what you see.” Or from a neurological perspective, the eyes look, the brain sees.
You can also use the analogy of using the right tool for the job. You can get a bolt loosened with a wrench or pliers, but a socket is more efficient and usually quicker. Different specs on your gear allow you to do different things.
Very often in a photography forum I’m in someone will ask about upgrading their equipment and there is always a large contingent that rails at them not to upgrade and it’s always “that [*insert camera model*] won’t improve your image quality”. I alway say image quality is the last reason I’d upgrade. When I went from a D7200 to a D500 I might have lost, (an unnoticeable amount), IQ, going from 24mp to 20mp. What I gained was a more robust build and better ergonomics, but the biggest reason was much faster AF with better tracking, a faster frame rate and a bigger buffer. When I added a Z7 to my arsenal yes the IQ of that 45mp full frame sensor was spectacular, (easily the best raw files I’ve worked with), but I bought it for the IBIS and the ability to see the exposure, no more guessing how much EC I want. I especially love that I can shoot time exposures up to 30 seconds long and see the exposure. I could still go out and get great shots with my old D40, but I get more enjoyment with the more advanced capabilities of my newer equipment.
Very well said Jim. Sometimes the enjoyment factor that the gear can bring you is enough and I totally agree with that. And while I know I can go out and shoot with a lesser camera, you’d have to pry my Sony A1 and 200-600 out of my hands I like it that much. It puts a smile on my face when I shoot it because I know if I put the necessary work ahead of time to get the shot, the camera will take care of the rest. Thanks!
I like the quote of an accomplished photographer/author who I follow: David duChemin (perhaps you know of him) “Gear is good but vision is better”
I also agree with the 80:20 thing although I might go a step further and say that the 80:20 is relative – so a beginner’s ‘amazing shot’ is not going to be in the same league as a pro’s ‘amazing shot’ and therefore the 20% gear uplift a beginner gets will not be anything like the 20% a pro can get. Using the same camera as Ansel Adams does not turn you into Ansel Adams (sorry!).
A camera can have all the most amazing functionality there is but if you don’t know how and when to use it (or perhaps even that you have it at all!) it really does not add anything to your images. So called ‘pro features’ are generally about giving more fine, manual control over things that most modern cameras can do extremely well on Auto. That is great if you know how/when to use that control BUT USELESS IF YOU DONT. As Matt stresses, there is absolutely NOTHING ‘wrong’ in using the tools built into your camera to help you, especially when you are learning – indeed, you positively SHOULD use them.
Using more basic gear to master the basics (subject matter, composition, lighting) is actually very sensible whereas using the latest top of the line pro-gear to do so is often a waste of money (paying for functions you don’t even know exist, let alone how to use) and time (it can actually make learning harder by giving too many options).
David
A VERY average intermediate photographer!
It’s also a lot to do with how your pictures are used. If you’re a Fine Art photographer then gear likely matters – up to a point. If you’re a professional sports photographer, having a camera that is capable of giving you low noise images at high ISO’s is important. If you’re printing pictures for your own use and not blowing them up to the nth degree then gear is going to be less important. Even images intended for publication don’t always need the best/latest camera given that most use JPEGs and don’t over print to create the best possible reproduction quality except in art magazines. Lenses are a different proposition though. You are unlikely to ever get decent photos from a rubbish lens. If you are a landscape photographer then a cheap tripod isn’t going to be of any use even for a beginner. To my mind gear might matter but it depends on what gear and in what circumstances.
Thats funny because I see it different in many ways. I’ve used every lens possible for landscapes. And after using the best quality prime glass, etc… I now only carry a 24-105mm f/4 which is about the cheapest you can find out of landscape lenses because I simply can’t see the different between that and more expensive ones. I favor my cheaper zoom lens for wildlife any day over the 10x more expensive prime 🙂 Thanks!
Matt. My fav Lens is also the 24-105mm. I bought it in 2010 or there abouts. It’s my go to for just about all types of scenes. Even won an All Florida award back in the day. Can’t put it down. Thanks.
Nice to see your answer to me shared. And expanded. I am sure it clarified the issue for a lot of the people who follow your posts. Take care.
Thanks for the idea Ken! 🙂
Great answer Matt. Unfortunately we’re all accustomed to short, pithy, catchy statements. Like everything else in life, the answer should be “Yes, but….”. Personal proficiency makes a big differences. The statement is true if you say, put entry level gear in a pro’s hands vs. pro level gear in an amateur’s hands. The pro’s photos will undoubtedly be better. But if I’m going on that once-in-a-lifetime trip, you bet I’ll bring my best gear with me!
Thanks Carl. Actually, I think my post could have been a lot shorter if I just said “put entry level gear in a pro’s hands vs. pro level gear in an amateur’s hands. The pro’s photos will undoubtedly be better.”. Kind of makes the same point and much shorter 🙂 Thanks again!
I love this comment. I hear so much of what you are mentioning and I also bring it back to my own expertise. And most times my issues are in the 80% column!
Appreciate your honest and candid response.