Got GAS?

[Storker]

GAS - shorthand for Gear Acquisition Syndrome - is a common ailment for hobby photogs and it seems as if it's more prevalent among men than women. I have it myself, and frankly I hate having it. I've always said that it's not the camera that makes the pictures, it's the person operating the camera.

But every once in a while I run into conditions that is better tackled with "better", i.e. more expensive gear. For topside action shooting I wanted quick and reliable AF, so I bought a high-end dSLR. Then I bought a fast short telephoto prime to blur the background properly in portraits. Then I bought a fast telezoom to keep my shutter speeds short enough for action shooting. Then I bought a wide angle zoom and a few other "special" lenses. That's about when I started shooting underwater, and lugging a huge dSLR underwater was out of the question, so I got a cheap housing for my compact. It took me about half a dozen dives to realize that the high-ISO IQ of a small sensor compact just doesn't cut it when you routinely need to shoot at minimum 400, sometimes up to 1600-3200 ISO and that onboard flash doesn't work underwater. So I got a mirrorless with a "proper" UW housing. I bought one strobe, two strobes, a fisheye, and a dome port for the FE. My last acquisition is a focus light, since the poor light up here makes focusing difficult, and the AF often just hunts. Particularly on night dives...

But it's still the photog that counts, right? Not the gear? Right?

 

[FishLovingStudent]

I just got my DLSR and I am already counting down the dollars until I can upgrade to a macro lens and dome...also another strobe...and a better focus light...

 

[dirtfarmer]

But it's still the photog that counts, right? Not the gear? Right?[/QUOTE

You bet. I've seen some pretty expensive dslr rigs in hands that don't know how to use them, that me and my cheap-o S-95 can outshoot.
I use a single s-2000 for my strobe and have a 1000 lumen wide angle video light that I added to supplement the 550 lumen light I've been using. I bought that mostly
because it's adjustable and the 550 Inon isn't. Yes I have a diopter that I use for Macro and I shoot way more macro than wide, and yes I do have a cheap wide angle lens to add
more pop to the video I shoot.

I don't know if your AF hunting is just a camera issue or an operator one.

If I have GAS it's a minor case and I have good control over the symptoms. When I consider going to a dslr I just remind myself that after I'm done with all the bells and wistles etc I could have spent it on a epic trip somewhere.

 

[KeithG]

so you are saying that having 9 strobes tucked away in the camera closet is nothing for me to be worried about?

 

[Storker]

I don't know if your AF hunting is just a camera issue or an operator one.

You might call it a camera issue, but I expect any contrast-based AF system to struggle when the ambient is correctly exposed around 1/15, f/4 @3200ISO. When it's that glum, it's easiest to just add some light.

 

[KeithG]

You might call it a camera issue, but I expect any contrast-based AF system to struggle when the ambient is correctly exposed around 1/15, f/4 @3200ISO. When it's that glum, it's easiest to just add some light.

looks like a perfect opportunity to purchase a pair of strobes with builtin target lights...

 

[Storker]

looks like a perfect opportunity to purchase a pair of strobes with builtin target lights...

I've got a pair of those. Inon Z240s. They're quite nice strobes, and Inon's TTL works great with my Olympus OM-D. At least with a little tweaking.

The built-in focusing light works fine on macro and "look at this cool critter-snap" type of shots. Problem is, I primarily shoot WA and CFWA, and for that kind of shooting I have to angle the strobes outwards to minimize backscatter, particularly when I'm using my FE lens. When I do that, the built-in focusing lights aren't pointing at the subject I try to focus on, and therein lies my problem.

 

[tamas970]

Just to get the full "picture", I also have the feeling, that GAS is significantly threatening real photography skills,
graphics found in another topic:


One typical symptom of acute GAS is driving towards larger and larger sensors, while loosing money and valuable time for
diving. Amazing, how quick the FF fewer is spreading while for most shooters don't need it at all. Result: approximately the
price of a lower cat. car will be missed in the budget. For amateurs forever, for the pro photographer for a long and unpredictable
business cycle.

You bet. I've seen some pretty expensive dslr rigs in hands that don't know how to use them, that me and my cheap-o S-95 can outshoot.
I use a single s-2000 for my strobe and have a 1000 lumen wide angle video light that I added to supplement the 550 lumen light I've been using. I bought that mostly
because it's adjustable and the 550 Inon isn't. Yes I have a diopter that I use for Macro and I shoot way more macro than wide, and yes I do have a cheap wide angle lens to add
more pop to the video I shoot.

I don't know if your AF hunting is just a camera issue or an operator one.

If I have GAS it's a minor case and I have good control over the symptoms. When I consider going to a dslr I just remind myself that after I'm done with all the bells and wistles etc I could have spent it on a epic trip somewhere.

 

[Storker]

Just to get the full "picture", I also have the feeling, that GAS is significantly threatening real photography skills,
graphics found in another topic:
View attachment 220894

Well, yes and no. I both agree and disagree. Sometimes the right gear helps you capture the images you want. Two of my favorites among the legendary photographers of the past are Ansel Adams and Henri Cartier-Bresson. Adams' qualities was in composition and fantastic darkroom (i.e. post-processing) work. He preferred the "large format sensor" of his time, an 8x10" large-format camera. He used available technology to the utmost, and by combining technology, post-processing and an almost unsurpassed talent for composition, he produced legendary work. So he's a poster boy for the technology-driven, "cheating" photographer. Read his books, they are quite interesting. On the other side, you have HCB. He never cropped his shots in the darkroom, but his contribution to photography is what is known as "the decisive moment". He used a simple Leica 35mm, put little effort in post-production, but he had an uncanny talent for getting the right shot at the right moment. His pictures could probably have been shot with a cheap P&S. It's all about what really is the properties of "a good picture", and there is no one single answer to that.

For myself - and please, don't think I'm comparing myself to the legends whom I admire - I find that technology for its own sake, expensive gear for its own sake, never makes a good picture. But on the other hand, some of the pictures I'm most happy with having shot are pictures I probably wouldn't have been able to shoot with simpler, cheaper gear. For an amateur like me, with quite limited talent, technology can - but won't necessarily - help me get the pictures I want. I'm not very good at nailing that one shot, so high-speed burst combined with good AF has given me a few action photos I'm rather satisfied with. I'd never been able to get those shots with a low-level consumer-grade camera. Similarly, shooting underwater where I dive is somewhat challenging. I mentioned upthread that ambient light around 1/15, f/4, 3200ISO isn't particularly unusual, and I like to shoot WA and get some ambient light in my pictures. Show me a small-sensor compact that can give me a decently low-noise image at 3200ISO. Heck, make that 800ISO, allowing for 2EV underexposure of the ambient. So sensor size may very well have an impact on "quality". Likewise, if you're shooting landscapes topside, you'll want a sharp lens to get the picture you want, and if you're shooting portraits you'll want a very fast, large-aperture lens on a decently large sensor to get the shallow DOF you want.

So, in short, although I think that that picture has a lot to contribute, don't take it as the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Because it's way too general. Like most other generalizations we see way too often in Internet discussions.


PS: If by "sensor size" you - or the guy who made that figure - were thinking about the "full format" craze (BTW, isn't every sensor "full"? ), I somewhat agree. My OM-D doesn't have a 24x36mm sensor, but it's rather capable in low light. Not quite as capable as my (topside) rather antiquarian Nikon D700, but pretty darned close. So far I don't see any need - for me - to "upgrade" (for me it would be a downgrade, since the m43 rig is quite large enough thankyouverymuch) to a larger sensor camera. I'd rather spend time learning how to use the tool I have as well as I can.

 

[tamas970]

Certainly there are pros, doing 200+ photo dives a year, solid and continuously maintained skillset, optimized supporting environment -> the only way to make it better is to follow the tech evolution.

There are we, <100 dives a year, maybe 50-60 "photo dives" (come'on, I won't lug the whole equipment on a quarry dive where I only went to meet friends and eat some nice sausages...). Here I'd say,
further improvement of skills, "support environment" (like strobes) improve the situation more, than a jump from m43 to APS-c or FF. Of course, you are 100% right, the 1/2.3" P&S is history (cannibalized
by phones for a good reason). But we've got rx100, lx100 compacts, nikon1 and m43. A valid reason for staying below the APS-c limit is size/weight: a wide angle setup (cam, lens, housing, port) with your OMD
or my e-pl5 weighs ~2kg. Same with an a7(xxx) will be around 4-5kg, depending if your superdome is glass or plastic. ISO800 is perfectly fine on todays 1"-m43 cameras, and the light necessary can be provided
by a pair of lightweight & robust z240's. GAS patients like me are welcome to buy stronger strobes which are expensive but will outlast several camera generations, thus their depreciation is much less than of a
dedicated housing. FF also have drawbacks: to get wide angle shots, one need an extremely large dome AND f11-f22 aperture to circumvent field curvature/corner softness.

As a third group I'd mention the holiday-only divers, producing <20 log-book entries: they are the ones who should be restricted to GoPro for their own safety...