As the saying goes, a fool and his money are soon parted. Or something like that.
The camera (or phone) you have in your camera bag, or wrapped round your neck, is most likely good enough for 90% of your photography, maybe even more, depending on the make, model, and type of photography you take. If you just take snapshots then keep shooting, and be happy.
BUT this doesn’t keep the wheels of capitalism and consumerism turning, manufacturers are constantly coming up with new ways to make you part with your cash. Mostly, it’s all well-intentioned, new cameras make money, this employs people, and in turn means people can pay their mortgages and feed their families.
But do you ever wish you could just feel happy with what you’ve got? This isn’t going to be easy, especially if you watch any form of media or read any kind of content, as advertisers are trying hard to take the money out of your bank account.
If you’ve been keeping an eye on the latest camera announcements, there are several new models that seem like small tweaks to existing models. Mark II cameras are often the most likely to be rather dull or fix glaringly obvious problems that shouldn’t have happened in the first place. (*cough* Nikon Z6 and Z7 I’m looking at you)
Some people think these updates should just be firmware updates to existing cameras, and Pentax even gave the option of sending away your camera to be upgraded to the new model (replacing the main circuit board in the Pentax K-1 DSLR), for a modest fee of course. But this was many times cheaper than having to buy the new model outright, so kudos goes to Pentax in this instance. In fact, it’s a shame that other companies don’t follow suit, but then, what looks better to shareholders? Selling a new camera for $3000 or offering an upgrade for $500… You know the answer to this already.
Looking at the bigger picture, the sad thing in all of this is that whilst you often do get a better product if you do buy a new model, it’s extremely difficult to justify the expense. And does the improvement benefit you, the user, or the company directors, who want to improve their luxury lifestyles by selling more expensive models?
When the percentage difference is likely to be a maximum 5% improvement in output, is the multi-thousand-pound expense justified? In many cases there may be no difference in image quality output, when compared side-by-side.
No, you DON’T need a new camera every year
If you still have the box for your camera, why not pack your camera up, wrap it up for a couple of weeks, and open it anew on Christmas day and pretend you’ve been given a brand new camera at the original RRP, and see what it can do for you. Chances are that if you’ve bought a nice camera in the last 10 years, it should give you some lovely results and make for a rather nice Christmas present. And if you do buy a new camera, why not give your old camera to someone as a present, and start someone else on the journey of photography, and not consumerism.
The views expressed in this column are not necessarily those of Amateur Photographer magazine or Kelsey Media Limited. If you have an opinion you’d like to share on this topic, or any other photography related subject, email: ap.ed@kelsey.co.uk
