paul_watson1

It is a pity your genuine question is receiving the inevitable "it's not the camera stupid!" replies. Bit of a knee jerk reaction from some photographers I imagine.

Other artists, painters and writers, will easily and eagerly name their favourite brand of brush or pen, oil or ink. They feel an affinity with the tools they use and because they experience so much of their creative life through these tools may even fall in love with them.

I know I love my camera. Would I love another camera as much? Quite likely.

As for your specific question; Confidence. That is what I think *quality* gear brings to the process. Confidence that what you put in will be efficiently and accuratley converted. Recently I bought a new tripod system. It replaced my first tripod which cost all of $10. Here I have just spent close to $800 on a few new pieces of gear which I cannot actually tell people allows me to do that much more than what I had with my old gear.

But when I use this new gear I am struck by how much more accuratley and safely it allows me to work. Where before I would think twice about a dangerous, to my camera, shot I feel confident in doing it now. I feel more confident which translates into better photos and I admire my gear for that.

Yes talent can take a great picture with virtually anything but good gear breeds confidence and that is not to be sneezed at.

And even more specific to your question; Lomo, Leica, Holga and Diana. People go out of their way to get these tools because they admire them for the how of what they do. Leica for very different reasons to the others but essentially the same admiration. If that is not the truth then at the very least nobody who likes the look of a Holga photograph would bother with getting a Holga, they'd just buy the nearest bit of junk to hand and make sure it leaks light.

And Matt, I'd like to hear your gear-admiration story.