Gear on here is like highway speed

[fjrabon]

I'm sure we've all heard the old saying "every driver thinks that every other driver that drives slower than they do is a road clogging idiot who needs to get out of the way, and every driver that drives faster than they do is an insane danger to the roads."

I kinda feel like that's the approach people #onhere often take with gear. Any gear that's even slightly below what they use is trash, anything that's slightly better than what they use is completely unnecessary, overpriced and a waste of money, and perhaps not even as good as cheaper gear (which they happen to own).

My favorite example of this is people who own D610's who sometimes try to argue that their camera is superior to a D600 that's had the shutter oil issue fixed but that there really isn't much difference between the D610 and D750, lol. Or the people who want to say there's a huge difference between full frame and APS-C, but medium format is an overpriced ripoff that doesn't make much difference.

And yes, I'm as guilty of this as anybody.

 

[bribrius]

I haven't really noticed much of that. In general seems like a pretty good group of people on here. Gear is very much a personal choice, with input appreciated toward achieving the goals you may want to achieve. Seems a few, have been rather emphatic about certain gear. But i didn't see them necessarily dismissing other peoples choices. But rather they might just have been so emphatic over their own choices the wording or sense of what they were saying was improper or mis-understood.

Only time i really have much thought on it at all, is if a person seems to have a lot of nice gear yet their photos still suck. Then i kind of wonder, but usually keep my thoughts to myself.
It is their money after all.
Gear insight is very helpful on here to a large extent though. Some of my own purchases have been made from references on this site. I still double check it with other sources, but some of the thoughts on a specific camera or lens have come from here and just paying attention and reading threads, even if not actively involved in them. I have also purchased things from members here, friendly transactions. So i have a fairly happy outlook on gear as associated with the forum.
Being somewhat ignorant on gear myself, it helps me to have the geek club here. If i have a question on lighting, gear, anything. I have pretty good chances of getting help.

 

[480sparky]

I really don't give a rodent's rectum what you use so long as it gives you the results you want.

 

[Fred Berg]

Outta my way, I got 4MP under my hood and I ain't afraid to use 'em!

 

[baturn]

I think bribrius said it very well and Sparky put it in a nutshell.

 

[limr]

 

[limr]

George Carlin was awesome

I suppose it does happen with gear a lot on here, but honestly, my eyes usually are glazed over well before that as soon as I start seeing model numbers flying around like gnats. I couldn't tell you the difference between any of them, and if I'm perfectly honest (which I usually am), then I'll also say that I don't notice anything appreciably better when someone supposedly upgrades and shows pictures from the new allegedly-better camera. Sorry.

 

[Derrel]

I'm sure we've all heard the old saying "every driver thinks that every other driver that drives slower than they do is a road clogging idiot who needs to get out of the way, and every driver that drives faster than they do is an insane danger to the roads."

that, and the George Carlin meme above...I've been using different descriptors for the slow and fast drivers? Does that make me a bad person?

When somebody is in front of me on the freeway and driving slow, I'm like, "What the hell is wrong with this slow-poke dip$hit!?", and when somebody blows past me at 85, 90,95 miles per hour on the freeway, I am like, "Wow, look at that dumb mutha****a', driving like an a**hole!"

GEAR? Whatever...I have a bunch of it, a lot of it is old. I think there is wayyyyyy too much adulation for "f/2.8" and ridiculously over-large wide zooms like 24-70s...those big, honking lenses are a detriment in many social photography situations. Pain in the butt to carry, but even worse, they make many "regular" people uncomfortable; we as photo nuts often have significant others who are totally used to having a camera pointed in their direction, and maybe a camera with a big, honking lens on it doesn't bother our closest friends and family, but in the real world of regular people, I think massively-sized lenses are an actual handicap much of the time. Lenses have grown larger and larger and larger over the last three decades.

A good case in point on fjrabon's gear disparagement syndrome: last week, I mentioned the old Nikon 35-70mm f/3.3~4.5 AF or AF-D zoom ($45 or so right now, at KEH) as one of Nikon's best 50mm lens alternatives, because it's about the same size and weight as a 50mm f/1.4 lens, or today's 50mm f/1.8 G lens; FIRST person to knock it mentioned that it's not sharp enough...

 

[unpopular]

I'll stick with my $20 lenses and $300 body

 

[bribrius]

I really don't give a rodent's rectum what you use so long as it gives you the results you want.

not entirely true. You totally dissed me for using fungus lenses with such a remark as how you wouldnt use one. Fungus needs a place to live too. Have a heart.
I am really just starting chit though so you can ignore this.

I'm sure we've all heard the old saying "every driver thinks that every other driver that drives slower than they do is a road clogging idiot who needs to get out of the way, and every driver that drives faster than they do is an insane danger to the roads."

that, and the George Carlin meme above...I've been using different descriptors for the slow and fast drivers? Does that make me a bad person?

When somebody is in front of me on the freeway and driving slow, I'm like, "What the hell is wrong with this slow-poke dip$hit!?", and when somebody blows past me at 85, 90,95 miles per hour on the freeway, I am like, "Wow, look at that dumb mutha****a', driving like an a**hole!"

GEAR? Whatever...I have a bunch of it, a lot of it is old. I think there is wayyyyyy too much adulation for "f/2.8" and ridiculously over-large wide zooms like 24-70s...those big, honking lenses are a detriment in many social photography situations. Pain in the butt to carry, but even worse, they make many "regular" people uncomfortable; we as photo nuts often have significant others who are totally used to having a camera pointed in their direction, and maybe a camera with a big, honking lens on it doesn't bother our closest friends and family, but in the real world of regular people, I think massively-sized lenses are an actual handicap much of the time. Lenses have grown larger and larger and larger over the last three decades.

A good case in point on fjrabon's gear disparagement syndrome: last week, I mentioned the old Nikon 35-70mm f/3.3~4.5 AF or AF-D zoom ($45 or so right now, at KEH) as one of Nikon's best 50mm lens alternatives, because it's about the same size and weight as a 50mm f/1.4 lens, or today's 50mm f/1.8 G lens; FIRST person to knock it mentioned that it's not sharp enough...

that was actually me, and i considered it a fair warning. Having both models, both have a questionable usable range. I think they made the list of the top ten lenses to be avoided. No joke, literally top whatever worst lenses ever made. I shoot with them, some of my photos i post come from them. I thought it important the person know what they are getting though. For me, i shoot with a lot of low end lenses anyway. Kind of used to it i shot with 1970's stuff still. For others, they may not be so willing to accept its limitations. It has a very small usable range if you want anything close to sharp. Distortion also not exactly appealing. touchy, very touchy lens.

 

[astroNikon]

I like cameras

and lenses

 

[fjrabon]

I'm sure we've all heard the old saying "every driver thinks that every other driver that drives slower than they do is a road clogging idiot who needs to get out of the way, and every driver that drives faster than they do is an insane danger to the roads."

that, and the George Carlin meme above...I've been using different descriptors for the slow and fast drivers? Does that make me a bad person?

When somebody is in front of me on the freeway and driving slow, I'm like, "What the hell is wrong with this slow-poke dip$hit!?", and when somebody blows past me at 85, 90,95 miles per hour on the freeway, I am like, "Wow, look at that dumb mutha****a', driving like an a**hole!"

GEAR? Whatever...I have a bunch of it, a lot of it is old. I think there is wayyyyyy too much adulation for "f/2.8" and ridiculously over-large wide zooms like 24-70s...those big, honking lenses are a detriment in many social photography situations. Pain in the butt to carry, but even worse, they make many "regular" people uncomfortable; we as photo nuts often have significant others who are totally used to having a camera pointed in their direction, and maybe a camera with a big, honking lens on it doesn't bother our closest friends and family, but in the real world of regular people, I think massively-sized lenses are an actual handicap much of the time. Lenses have grown larger and larger and larger over the last three decades.

A good case in point on fjrabon's gear disparagement syndrome: last week, I mentioned the old Nikon 35-70mm f/3.3~4.5 AF or AF-D zoom ($45 or so right now, at KEH) as one of Nikon's best 50mm lens alternatives, because it's about the same size and weight as a 50mm f/1.4 lens, or today's 50mm f/1.8 G lens; FIRST person to knock it mentioned that it's not sharp enough...

Yeah, I mean I like the gear I have. But that's simply because I sell/trade/donate everything I don't love. My gear's test is simply the bag test. How often does it get pulled out of the bag is the beginning and the end of my analysis on whether it's good gear for me. Lens I have up for sale is a great lens, but it just stayed in the bag, so it's up for sale.

 

[480sparky]

I really don't give a rodent's rectum what you use so long as it gives you the results you want.

not entirely true. You totally dissed me for using fungus lenses with such a remark as how you wouldnt use one. Fungus needs a place to live too. Have a heart.
I am really just starting chit though so you can ignore this.

I wouldn't use a lens full of fungus simply because fungus is a living organism and can spread to other lenses. That's a world of difference from using low-end gear simply due to one's financial abilities.

 

[Derrel]

I have to agree on fungus...it must be eliminated by removal.

 

[bribrius]

I really don't give a rodent's rectum what you use so long as it gives you the results you want.

not entirely true. You totally dissed me for using fungus lenses with such a remark as how you wouldnt use one. Fungus needs a place to live too. Have a heart.
I am really just starting chit though so you can ignore this.

I wouldn't use a lens full of fungus simply because fungus is a living organism and can spread to other lenses. That's a world of difference from using low-end gear simply due to one's financial abilities.

They were cheap. i could afford them. And long as i don't face them near the sun it doesn't show up in the pics. Shooting bw with them seems to help too. i hear ya though. could spread...