My perspective on becoming "spoiled"

If you can realistically afford it then nothing wrong with buying camera gear or anything else that makes you happy.

I got my first DSLR 4 years ago, a BRAND NEW Rebel Xti. I was sooooo happy to get it! (For the record, I still think it was an amazing camera.) I then wanted a second body so I got a 30D, then sold the XTi and got a 20D for matching "prosumer" bodies, then sold the 20D and got a 40D (my dream camera of 2007.) Well all those cameras were pretty much the same quality wise, yes the 40D was very quick but it didn't help MY style of photography. Sold the 40D, got the 5D. Love it!

I've downsized my lens collection, at one point I had a 24-60, 10-20, 70-200, and Sig30 and 85mm. Had all the FL covered! But when I got the 5D I decided to do some changed- 24mm was wide enough now so I sold the 10-20, swapped the 30 for 50mm, and recently sold the 70-200 which I never use (I might want to get a 2.8 lens at some point). I've got a pretty modest set but it does exactly what I need it to do for me. The money I got from selling the 70-200 is going towards a Canon S200 compact when I can find one- because I don't like dragging my gear everywhere but would like to take more pictures.

My gear lust is over, I buy things practically now.

I don't think is becoming spoilt, its wanting the equipment you shoot with to advance as your skill level improves. Equipment qualities and features are created at different levels and price-points. Most people cannot justify (to themselves) that they go out and purchase at the top price point. I'm sure there are people who purchase top-of-the-line equipment immediately and never shoot with what they buy. I would suggest that is more spoilt.

DStanic wrote in post #13436130
If you can realistically afford it then nothing wrong with buying camera gear or anything else that makes you happy.

I like that statement alot.

If you are lusting after a certain piece of gear because your friend has it, I think that is the wrong reason. Keeping up with the "Joneses" can lead to poor decisions. I don't see anything wrong with wanting a new lens because you feel you can do good work with it. If you want simply for the sake of wanting then get yourself some professional help. I don't believe that anyone is spoiled because they have a nice gear list that they have worked hard at to put together. I think the spoiled part comes in when you see young people complaining because they don't have it and no one will buy it for them.

Life has been pretty good to me and I have all the gear that I desire for my personal shooting right now. I had thought of the 400 f/2.8 but I had the chance to use one once and for the focal length it was too heavy for my liking. Other than the 1Dx to come in the spring I have no desires for anything at this point in time.

My name is Jeff and I'm a gear aholic ...........boy can I relate to this post. How ever I do believe if you can afford to buy good gear, then do it. I also agree that mastering your image quality is a number one priority. I have about all the gear I need except a long lens. I love shooting nature/zoo would really like to buy a long lens, first choice 400 2.8L IS. Great for that ever so often sports event and also those nature shots...add the 2X II on it and you still have a good aperture setting. Next choice would be the Sigma 50-500 giving you great distance and zoom ability, not so good in low light, but at the fraction of the cost of the Canon.

So I keep reading and looking for the great deal.......I do feel by eagle season on the Mississippi, I'll be owning one of them.

Many photographers suffer from GAS... (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) myself included.

I had the (mis)fortune of shooting with the Canon 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L for the many months of DSLR ownership. Going back to the 28-135mm I had was awful!

I'm lacking in the super tele range and the ultra wide angle. I'll go for super tele then uwa and be set. The 70-200 I've got at f/4 is actually not fast enough now that I'm getting "work" with my church. Events at f/4 with no flash don't work out that well. I'm pushing the limits of high ISO on the 7D in that arrangement.

500/4 lust is also known to me, having a bunch of friends with them and me with 'only' a 400/5.6, however I changed tactics, now when I go out with them I don't bring a tele but choose a WA and a Macro, then, at the end of the day I'll have a bunch of pictures that they don't and hey, if I want a photograph of a particular warbler, I can simply ask one of them to email one to me. With so many well equipped, dedicated and competant bird photographers out there I find myself questioning why I should want to be taking yet another shot ofthe bird. My 400 is fine for record or ID shots.
I still do get a twinge when I look at the fabulous results that are achievable with that lens tho'...

ChrisSearle wrote in post #13439451
500/4 lust is also known to me, having a bunch of friends with them and me with 'only' a 400/5.6, however I changed tactics, now when I go out with them I don't bring a tele but choose a WA and a Macro, then, at the end of the day I'll have a bunch of pictures that they don't and hey, if I want a photograph of a particular warbler, I can simply ask one of them to email one to me. With so many well equipped, dedicated and competant bird photographers out there I find myself questioning why I should want to be taking yet another shot ofthe bird. My 400 is fine for record or ID shots.
I still do get a twinge when I look at the fabulous results that are achievable with that lens tho'...

This is a good point. I'm considering picking up a 10-22 to get some wide angle stuff. I could get some interesting landscape perspectives shooting from a kayak and it would be a way to explore a new area that I haven't really used yet. I also need a macro lens one of these days and will probably pick up the 100L.