Anyone who says the camera isn't important is wrong
Monday 30 March 2026, 14:41 by Nando Harmsen | 2,137 views | 7 commentsThis article was translated from Dutch with the help of AI. Read the original.
You hear it regularly: the camera isn't important. And indeed, the photographer takes the photo. The camera is just the tool. I say it regularly too. Yet it isn't entirely true. The camera is definitely important.
You, as the photographer, are the one who takes the photo. You determine the exposure and composition, and choose the subject you capture. You decide when to press the button. You take the photo, the camera is just the tool you use.
This is completely true. The camera is nothing more than the means you use to take the photo. It is a tool. Another camera will not produce better or prettier photos. Just as any hammer can drive a nail into wood.
That comparison with a hammer isn't so strange after all. You might be able to drive a nail into the wood with any hammer. That doesn't mean it is equally easy with every hammer. You choose the right hammer for the right nail and piece of wood.
Imagine using a sledgehammer for a small, fragile nail. Or a small, lightweight hammer for a large, thick, long nail. You might eventually manage it, but it will take a lot of effort. And perhaps leave you with a bruised thumb.
Cameras are the same. You choose a camera not for the photo, but for the process of taking a photo. A large Nikon Z 9 is possible for street photography, but not ideal. A smaller Sony A6700 is better suited to it.
A Canon R50 can be used for fast action, but the chance of getting a shot is much smaller than when you use that Nikon Z 9. The Sony A6700 may be suitable for street photography, but for ultra-wide-angle photography the crop sensor in that camera is less suitable.
You understand the bigger picture. You can take good photos with any camera. It doesn't matter whether you have a camera that costs 800 euros or one that costs 8,000 euros. But when it comes to performance for specific types of photography, the difference will matter.
That is why the camera is indeed important. The camera determines whether you can practise a type of photography with difficulty or extremely well. So choose a camera that is suitable for your photography, and choose it carefully.
About the author
Nando Harmsen has been photographing for more than 40 years. He specialises in wedding photography and landscape photography. Nando also gives talks, workshops, masterclasses and photo trips, and regularly reviews new and interesting equipment.
You might also like
-
The Most Useful Tool for a Photographerby Nando Harmsen
-
Wrong settings or just not optimal settings?by Nando Harmsen
-
There Is No Such Thing as Bad or Good Lightby Nando Harmsen
-
Street Photography Tip: Blurry Isn't Always Bad!by Michiel Heijmans
7 comments
-
Hans wrote on Tuesday 31 March 2026 at 11:42 | replyThat is something I have been saying myself for years too. That is also the reason I switched cameras since I started doing landscape photography. I had a good Nikon before that, but for various reasons switched to the Fuji GFX, and yes I was lucky that I could afford this, which I don't think is the case for everyone!
Translated from Dutch.
Definitely happy with the switch! -
Walter wrote on Tuesday 31 March 2026 at 12:40 | replyNice article. There's always something to say about it. The old-fashioned camera shop would be very suitable for making the right choice. If you start with something more than just your phone, although you can get quite far with that nowadays too, then it isn't so much about the camera yet. While taking photos, it's good to experience what you enjoy and to ask yourself whether that can be done more easily. And then Nando comes around the corner.
Translated from Dutch.
And Hans I went analog to experience medium format and to have somewhat lower initial purchase costs. By now I'm a few cameras further along and maybe I could have gone straight for digital medium format as well
But the experience of analog is (again) really fun. -
paulusvanaken@gmail.com wrote on Tuesday 31 March 2026 at 12:46 | replyThe comparison is quite nice. A camera like the Z9 ( or a D5 ) is a beast, but can only be afforded by people who get paid for their work ( or who have money to spare anyway). Nearly everything you can do with it can also be done with lighter versions, so take a good look at what you really need, and you’ll save a lot of money.
Translated from Dutch.
And about that wide angle with crop sensors, my 8-19 mm Sigma has a very respectable angle of view, as far as I know only Canon has a wider angle for full frame..... -
Nando
wrote on Tuesday 31 March 2026 at 14:11
| reply
A focal length of 8-19mm for APS-C still gives you a 12-27mm angle of view (approximately).
Translated from Dutch.
For full-frame, you can go further, down to 10mm and sometimes shorter. For APS-C, that becomes more difficult.
But not impossible... I think.
-
Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 31 March 2026 at 15:33 | replyA nice story that is hardly open to criticism. You can take good/beautiful photos with any camera. For me, it is important that the camera works correctly mechanically and nowadays also electronically/software-wise. To give an example: you set the mechanical shutter to 1/60 second. Then it should also be 1/60 second and not 1/40 second. The glasswork (lens) must therefore also function properly, with the correct aperture opening.
Translated from Dutch.
Camera in order? Then there is nothing stopping the photographer from taking a good photo. -
Martin Carels wrote on Tuesday 31 March 2026 at 18:12 | replyWhen I read all this, it seems like photography is only for well-off amateur photographers. I think few hobby photographers can spend thousands of euros on camera bodies and lenses, I certainly can't. Therefore I don't entirely agree with the article. I photograph with a Nikon D7500 and have a few lenses ranging from 300 to 900 euros, mostly zooms. Still, I have already won prizes in the Lowland Photo Contest and received good reviews in Shoot Magazine and other magazines. - If the photo isn't good at 1/60sec, take a second one with different settings, that's what I do with landscape photography.
Translated from Dutch. -
Nando
wrote on Wednesday 1 April 2026 at 00:08
| reply
Let me put it differently: You want to photograph birds in flight with your Nikon D7500. You notice that you mainly achieve results that are not satisfactory, apart from that one lucky shot.
Translated from Dutch.
If you do the same with a second-hand Nikon D5, the results will be satisfactory much more often. The camera is more suited to that.
But if you photograph landscapes instead of birds in flight, then it doesn't matter whether you choose a D7500 or a D5.
Unless you photograph landscapes in harsh conditions a lot. Then the D5 will let you down much less quickly.
As I say in my article: the camera has nothing to do with the quality of your photos. But a camera can make a difference in achieving the result.
Have your say
Please note: Articles older than a week can only be commented on by signed-in visitors.Would you still like to comment? sign in or create a free account.
Elja Trum
Photofacts; everything to do with photography!
Would you like to take better photos and keep up with what is happening in photography? Photofacts publishes articles that teach you something about photography — from a product announcement to a practical shooting tip or a look at a website. Photofacts covers photography every day and is a hobby project of Elja Trum's that got out of hand. The articles are written by a team of volunteer authors. If you would enjoy writing one or more articles for Photofacts, do get in touch.More about PhotofactsPhotofacts is made possible in part by
