This may resonate with many, it did with me when a friend mentioned in passing a preference for internal zoom lenses or primes. I realised I do to, but have several lenses that break that self enforced limitation.
When I shot only for myself, I had lines drawn, preferences that I had the luxury of indulging, because the gear, the process and the results were all even partners in the hobby, no matter how seriously I took it.
I used to dislike zooms that extended (the very thing my friend mentioned avoiding), I liked gear to “match” both cosmetically and mechanically. I disliked illogical holes in my lens range and equally having too much gear.
I hated a ding on a camera, a worn bag, a scratched filter, a lens with a slightly less than perfect mount fit. I was fussy, because a lot of the hobby revolved around collecting the perfect kit, enjoying the process and building kits I liked.
An example of this was my very unfortunate quick sale of the 12-100 on the eve of my photographic fortunes changing. I was never a huge fan of zoom lens barrel extension, really disliked the slight (very slight) wobble in the barrel and felt I had too many lenses at the time.
The only reason I even bought extending barrel lenses, often a mechanical imperative for best optical performance, was because I worked in a camera shop and could try out several copies to find the most mechanically “tight” example, so after testing one and being impressed by it’s performance, even for an M43 lens with lots of good ones to compete with, I went for it.
When I turned professional, (well I guess that is what happened, by degrees until I can honestly say I do this more than anything else for money), my needs and perceptions changed.
Now it is clearly all about “as long as it works” and nothing else.
Case in point.
I once had a 12-40 f2.8 and it was great, but thanks to not having a filter on, another metal lens hood in my bag put the smallest of scratches on the lens. I sold it…. cheap. I also learned a lesson about the ability of small M43 lenses to float around in some bags.
I bought another one on special a couple of years later, a last minute impulse thing before a holiday. Another great lens, tight, but still the same pop-out design and it developed a very slight “lump” in the zoom, so it fell into occasional use.
After I started working with my gear, I managed to get sand in the barrel at a beach shoot. Being weather sealed it is external only, between the outer and inner barrels, but the “lump” got very noticeable, with added grinding sounds, so I put the lens into the “imminent replacement likely” category.
I bought the 12-60 Leica with a G9 and felt better, I had a backup and a good one.
When I started at the paper, deciding to use my own gear, I decided to first kill-off my oldest and sickest equipment hoping the paper might fix what was needed (I was saving them kit) or I would just replace it as I went.
Nothing broke or wore out, but I did start to treat things differently.
The older G9 (dropped twice) and EM1.2, the light weight 40-150 f4 and the 12-40 were pressed into service in my every day bag, EM1x’s and faster glass were reserved for sport, other cameras or the Pen F for personal stuff.
Funny thing, the more I used the 12-40, the more the zoom tightness eased and the less I cared about any of it’s ailments that concerned me so much before. The 40-150 f4, a lock-back style lens also became relatively loose over a year, but the key was, I was comparing heavy use and a lot of image wins with some light mechanical wear and tear.
I am always humbled by the work the mechanically ill 12-40 produces. It is my go to for events, studio shoots, sports and video. Sometimes I notice the grinding sensation or it gets a little sticky, I even hear it occasionally, but I just get on with it.
The lens became a favourite again performing flawlessly, especially for video, especially on the G9. My only complaint then was one of weight, but that was on the box.
How things had changed.
When packing now, I hardly ever think about the gear’s condition beyond “will it work on the day”, only the level of gear needed* and its relevance to the job at hand.
Both of my EM10.2’s, my last two reliable EM5.1’s, my oldest G9 and EM1.2 and my 75-300 are all a little “twitchy” with things to be aware of, but at the right time and in the right place, they all work well enough. I might well get another half million frames out of them, which is effectively the working life of a new EM1x.
Dings and scratches?
They have become a badge of my professional history. The 40-150 f2.8 has plenty of marks, the older cams are all showing wear (with a variety of internal textures showing through). The 8-18 has been dropped twice with only the hood showing any sign, the 300 has some mild scratches etc. Nothing I use regularly is “mint” anymore and nor should it be.
Important basketball match? Yep, the less than perfect 12-40, matched with the worn 40-150 were automatic. Two of my most time tested lenses.
All good, because I did that. I used them and they have the scars to prove it. They also have the images and generated income also as justification.
I think what happens is your mental measure of a bit of kit changes.
I used to think about how it felt in the hand, cosmetics, tested sharpness, kit perfection, AF speed and occasional results as my gauge.
I now only use the measure of results achieved.
If AF lets me down constantly, I relegate the lens to less stressful situations. If the lens is sharp, renders well, hits focus and has the needed aperture speed and range, but has a little wobble of stiffness, then it is still a winner by any measure.
If a lens literally falls apart in my hand, then I will let it rest, having served me well, then grab what ever I bought as backup and get on with it. If I know I will miss it, I will replace it, maybe with a different option as there are so many**, get it fixed or evolve into the next thing.
*For junior school shoots, in. studio situation or a simple portrait shot, I will use the oldest and cheapest gear, partly because it can still do it, partly because it often looks less intimidating. For sport, I will go with light, using slower lenses if I can, then go into the “full noise” gear when needed.
**The definition of professional is not necessarily the gear you turn up with, but the ability to keep going if you loose it, i.e. backups. The 12-40 was technically replaced by the 12-60 Leica, but to be honest, that lens is now my G9II’s mate for video, so maybe a tiny 12-45 f4, amazing 8-25 f4, versatile 12-100 f4, the near perfect Pana 10-25 f1.7 or neat 12-35 f2.8. Maybe I will just get another one.