Pixiq

(The thumbnail for this post is a scan of one of my old photos for a play, scanned from the New York Times)

I spent tens of thousands of dollars on photo equipment when photography was a hobby.  Now, after 11 years as a fine art photographer, here's what I'm putting in my bag for the shoot at La Mama tonight.

I'll be photographing the dress rehearsal for a play at La Mama (which is in New York's East Village).  La MaMa is perhaps one of the top three off-broadway theaters in NYC.

The only reason I say that is because I know them, and since I don't know much about off-broadway in NYC - well - it's known anyway.

So what is the professional photographer taking for the shoot?  Basically what I have and use.

Canon DSLR T1i (what - isn't that a consumer camera?)

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (I don't care what anyone says, I love this lens wide-open)

Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS lens (Yikes, that's not even an 'L' lens; true, but it is very sharp and has IS which is real useful in dim light)

And maybe, the Canon 50mm f/1.4 (cheap, and one of the best lenses Canon has)

What camera did I have before the T1i - I had the Canon 5D.  Yes.  The full-frame 5D.  I bought it at a good price - used.  And after one month, I traded it in, and bought the T1i.  That must seem odd.  But the truth is that I was missing shots with the auto-focus on the 5D in dark scenes; and sometimes when it wasn't that dark.  The 5D came out before the T1i, and was still using older technology.  I picked up the T1i, half-thinking that I was a bit crazy - only to hear from a bunch of other photographers that they too were moving away from the larger "pro" line to the consumer line of dslrs.

I may shoot a bit of video if I have the time—not that it's necessary—but the director and playwright would enjoy having it.

Now how is it that I went from using the most expensive cameras to some of the least expensive cameras...  In other words, for years I used Leica rangefinders, but eventually moved to Canon SLRs and a few niche cameras like the Hexar Autofocus.

I guess there's a bunch of related factors, but in the digital world, the camera body is sort of a throwaway for me (unlike the film body).

Cameras are mostly computers nowadays, and I don't know if their capabilities double every few years, but they improve dramatically every two years or so.  And what happens is that the really good advancements from the top of the line trickle down to the prosumer and consumer cameras.

I also like that the consumer DSLRs are smaller and lighter, which goes along with one of my rules which is to always have a camera with you.

So when I got the T1i I was already thinking that I'd be up for whatever came next if it added what I wanted - in my own case the swivel LCD back - and now that is available on the 60D.

Well anyway - that's the logic behind it.  I haven't bought or changed lenses in years.  Don't see any reason to.  Invest in good glass and you won't have to do it twice.

The same goes for your camera bag, your tripod, and shoes.  But the digital body of a dslr - I just can't see spending money to get the top of the line since it too will be replaced in two years.  Of course, I'm just a freelance artist - and a lot of what I'm saying might be different if I were for example, a well-paid wedding photographer.  But I'm not.

I never know how the finances will go from year to year.  The one thing I do know is that I don't have the personality to spend money on a camera body which will be greatly improved in a few years. 

Oh, what else am I taking to the shoot tonight?  Several SD cards, mostly 4GB, but I also have two fast 8 GB cards in case I want to do video.  And three batteries.  That's overkill.  Odds are I won't even go through one battery - again - unless I end up doing video which does eat up batteries.

I'll post images and gallery shots in a day or two.