Do you really need all these gadgets

I don't know about anyone else, but I constantly battle myself on two different philosophy premise:

1) "Well, if I am going to already spend (insert monetary value) then what is a few (insert monetary value) more?".

2) "Do I really need to spend (insert monetary value) to get that feature(s)"

Example. I was in the market for a new dSLR last year; I was trying to decide betwen the nikon d80, d200 and d2x. My first premise tells me that I should buy the d200 over the d80 to get the additional features for a few dollars more. My second premise tells me I don't need a d2x at over 3 times the price of the d200 to get a few extra features. I ended up purchasing the d200. That being said, I sometimes find myself wondering if I could have used some of the d2x features, or could I have been happy with the d80.

When I look at the 'break the bank' question I have strong opinions. I fell into the trap 10 years ago after learning to dive and falling into love with it; I wanted to be able to take pictures/video while uw. At the time I was not making much money but that did not stop me. I dropped cash (er, should I say credit) on a JVC DV cam and an Ikelite enclosure/lights. While this was not the highest end setup out there, I could have gone much cheaper. Over the next year my diving frequency was curtailed as credit card bills start to accumulate. I eventually had to put myself on diving exile until my finances were under control again. After that first year of no diving, if someone would have asked me to choose between being able to dive again or keep my camera and bills, it would have been a simple answer; back to diving. However that was not a choice and buyers remorse starts to creep up. I made a promise to myself (and maybe the wife) that I would never purchase luxury items unless I was using luxury money. What I find really strange about the whole paradigm is the idea that spending non-real money (credit) was really easy for me but spending actual cash I had saved was extremely difficult. I made the decision to buy the Ikelite kit in a matter of days, while it took me months to settle on my latest setup.

I would highly encourage folks out there to dive & video/photo within thier means. It is easy to justify why you NEED a new *whatever*, try to justify why you DON'T NEED it.

Anyone wanna buy a used UW video setup?

Interesting thread Dean... kind of reminds me of golf and the "need" to buy the latest greatest monster driver to be just like Tiger... when in reality most of us would be happy to have a couple straight drives land on the fairway only 200yd down (or at least past the ladies tee in my case )

Well I could never justify buying a FX1/FX7 and phenom, etc... First off, I'm a holiday diver, albeit one who seems to be on holiday more than often Having something that travels light trumps having the best out there for me... Also, I have no delusions of becoming a pro photog or videographer... but that doesn't preclude me from buying the "best" in that category... Looking at my inital footage... I've got a looong way to go but that's the fun of all this... And the few seconds where I did get it right... well IMHO it was worth the price...

now back to the books and more practice for me!

Well here is another way to look at it.

Smokes cost like $15+ AUS a pack.

A pac a day and you are looking at like $100 per week which is $5200 per year.

So for us non smokers we just use that money we saved

Then there is booze, I spend maybe $0-10 per week if that, so that saved money can go on more toys.

So stop smoking and drinking and save save save.

Of course we need to spend all that cash: otherwise the sponsors would quit sponsoring wetpixel :-)

I like to buy new things and see how they work. I always research and try to pick the best I can get to fit my needs. Part of the enjoyment of life

I agree with the last two posts. What's the point in going to work if you can't spend your hard earned cash on things you want, but don't necessarily need.

Alex

Wags made a point..

I agree with the Fags part (cigs to our American cousins*) but $10 0n booze come on Wags I spent the equiv of $180 on the bloody juice last night

We made a calculation that one of our 'old soaks' down the local spends £17000 ($34000 or $51000aus) on fags and beer per year needless to say he's got a problem.

Its all about priorities

Dive safe

DeanB

*I remember my mate asking a Texan Policeman where he could get some fags when we were there on a stopover...His face was a picture

*I remember my mate asking a Texan Policeman where he could get some fags when we were there on a stopover...His face was a picture

Greetings,

Similar experience on my first trip to a pub--dude asked me if I "had a fag... " Fortunately, my cute escort enlightened me

Back to our regularly scheduled thread--I'm getting into UW video (after botching UW still for years <_< ) and have done HOURS of research the last few weeks on this site and many others. My theory: learn from those who have gone before.

Me personally has decided to purchase a used camera and housing so's I can get into this slowly and deliberately. Proven mechanical housing, proven digital camera, price reasonable (for this game... :glare: ) and recommended by a professional UW video photog friend.

As a sidebar, it's been almost a year since I decided I wanted to get a rebreather...had an epiphany down in Coz when I realized how much fun I had on OC (and how easy it was) taking pictures and sharing them with friends. The rebreather thing was just a gadget fascination...fortunately, I came to my senses B4 I carved out a nice chunk of my checkbook

New gadget fascination ? Guilty. Anticipation keeps us alive! B)

Rick

It's you lot that made me buy my FX1! It's so bloody heavy that i need a system of ropes and pulleys to lower the thing into the water. I'm off to sell the damn thing a buy a housed box browny. ;-)

Case study no:1

Why we should at least hire or borrow someone elses gear before we take on suggestions of what to buy next...

Johnny boy and the heavy weight housing: did he really need such a large item for the time being or should he have just bought the A1 or even gone to Extreme (small plug..Sorry) facilities and hired the intended purchase to gather research of suitability..

Dive safe

Dean(bastion of the A1 society)B

If I worked for the BBC or ran an underwater dive hire shop for professionals etc, then yes I would invest heavily in top notch gear.

If someone has heaps of cash to throw away, then I wouldn't hold it against them from buying the latest stuff even if they are just holiday jockeys. I dive once a month and take film. I don't feel the need to go above my budget, even though I wouldn't say no to a contract for underwater filming. My challenge is very different and has been aluded to earlier when someone said they had seen better film from an older setup.

What am I trying to accomplish? To produce underwater film that will be acceptable as a good quality film to friends associates and professionals alike. Do I need the latest Ikelite to do this? I don't think I do. Some lighting, some lenses, a good video editing program, good technique and I reckon my old DV can produce something comparable to underwater HD video anytime.

A mate of mine has just invested alot of money and already taking film on his rolls royce unit but to tell you the truth, his video's don't look any different to mine off the camera. I don't have any goals as far as becoming professional are concerned, but I would be stupid if I didn't say I wanted to improve all the time. My constraints are my budget and learning a new game in such a short period of time but with a fairly simple setup as I have, it more than does the job I need ot to do. That is amaze people who have never even seen local underwater video except the stuff on TV which is sorta unrealistic to them.

My 2c

The answer to the original question is probably NO we don't NEED all these gadgets. This probably applies both to the pros and the ams. Some people will WANT some of them for the business or their pleasure.

The most important thing is that we don't overstep the financial mark possibly putting ourselves and others at risk. We must only spend what we can genuinely afford.

We all have different spending patterns, I'm often astonished at what some of our friends spend on clothes and eating out. I know people who would easily spend £5000 ($10000) on a new sail for their racing boat, or buy madly expensive cars or pay exorbitant fees to play a round of golf. Each to their own.

The pros are potentially worse off, they have the perfect excuse for "investing" but if it all goes pear shaped then maybe their livelyhood, houses and families are at risk.

It's a bit like the old adage - "don't do the crime if you can't do the time"

Roger

Exactly..

Dive safe

DeanB

First off, thanks Dean for starting this thread.

I myself have been a still shooter for close to 30 years now and shooting video for the last four. I went through the various phases as a gear mogering shooter back in the 80's when at one point I had 5 Canon F1 Bodies most with motor drives, not power winders, 8 lenses and all the assorted accessories (Oh to be in my 20's again and have a strong back)

These days, I ascribe to the opposite extreme, minimalist gear makes for a better shooter IMO.

I still shoot miniDV shooting a couple of TRV950's, a Rode VideoMic, Century Optics .55x Wide Angle adapter, Bogen 3001 legset with fluid head. That's it for my above water gear. Add my L&M Bluefin housing, w/a lens port and L&M lights and I'm all set. I edit either on a generic desktop or my lowly Dell D400 Centrino laptop with SONY's Vegas 7, Cinescore and Sound Forge.

That's it.

I think too many look to the gear to save them when having skills is more important.

Sure, gear does help, but I have seen amazing results done with Leica Rangefinders and 2 lenses (Several Nat Geo Photogs actually shot spreads that way - I should know - I spent time with them in the early 90's). These days it's about shooting HDV when venerable cameras like the PD150, 170, VX2000, PDX10, TRV950 still have alot of life in them.

I still say that unless your distribution is HD, then it's overkill. Yeah you can down rez to SD and that is where virtually everyone still is.

Content distribution on the net is the wave of the future. As bandwidth increases, full rez standard def will be the norm - and possibly HD, but that's still many years down the road IMO.

I see internet only content channels with embedded advertising in the videos being the wave of the future, and those who embrace that paradigm are in for a great ride. Newspapers and magazines are already looking for those video content creators who know what they are doing for their websites as print publication readership is dropping dramtically. If you can provide quality, engaging video content for these portals, you have it made - and it doesn't have to be in HD to be broadcast.

It doesn't matter what you edit with, or shoot with (within reason of course). Quality content is just that. Use what you can afford and exploit it til you can't any longer - you will be amazed at how much you can do with so called "Amateur" equipment.

So, anyone looking to start up an internet u/w channel?

Content distribution on the net is the wave of the future. As bandwidth increases, full rez standard def will be the norm - and possibly HD, but that's still many years down the road IMO.

Cliff, that's how I was thinking until very recently. But the 16:9 videos I've been posting on my Stage6 channel are a whopping 960x540. This is already bigger than full rez standard definition. And some like David White are posting even bigger. And they're getting watched by a lot people. So "high definition" net distribution is already happening.

And let's not forget that distribution is not the only reason we do what we do. Whether you are a pro or just a hobbyist like me, it's aweful nice to watch HD videos/footage on an HDTV.

Cliff, that's how I was thinking until very recently. But the 16:9 videos I've been posting on my Stage6 channel are a whopping 960x540. This is already bigger than full rez standard definition. And some like David White are posting even bigger. And they're getting watched by a lot people. So "high definition" net distribution is already happening.

I have seen yours and David's work there - nice stuff mate!

There are uw internet channels, ie. www.ocean.com

Hey Cliff,

In your list of venerable old DV cams, you left off the Godfather of them all, the one that was king of the hill for several years(not months like today) and the was the original Sony DCR-1000. Not until the 900 and 2000 came out did it pass away into lore. Interestingly enough, the 950 was not as good as the 900 and the 2100 not as good as the 2000. Going back even further, the Sony Tr 101 Hi-8 was the best you could get until Dv came out. In those days, no one ever heard or , at least thought about, manual white balance.

This is all evolution and we are part of it. Just hope I'm alive and shooting when they come out with the newest 3D Holographic High Def cams which will capture footage to a 2inch disc capable of holding 100gigs each of lossless, uncompressed data.

Steve B)