Why I'm Saying No to Upgrading My Gear: The Surprising Truth Behind Shiny Toy Syndrome

I’m right in the middle of not buying any more video kit.

As someone who frequently shoots with high-end cameras, I've been caught up over the years in the never-ending cycle of upgrading to the latest and greatest gear. We are talking at least once every quarter. However, I've made the decision to not upgrade my video kit this year, and hopefully the next too.

Honestly it's much better appreciating what you have than constantly opening new boxes of shiny new toys that lose their appeal after just a few days. I'd argue that the actual improvements to the latest technology in camera are now marginal year on year, especially if you shoot for internet consumption on smartphones.

To understand why I'm resisting this years Shiny Toy Syndrome, let me quickly explain "planned obsolescence" as I find this interesting.

This term refers to the practice of designing products with a limited lifespan so that consumers will feel compelled to replace them sooner rather than later. It originated in the 1920s, from lightbulb companies, who were among the first to implement it. The idea is to have products that have a shelf life, therefore the customer buys more and the business will never go bust from creating products that lasted forever.

Now, most cameras are absolute tanks, and can last for a long time, but when a new product launches, the marketing is all about the upgrade. This makes owners of older cameras feel like they need the upgrade, especially as the regular software updates halt.

Although this is not the same as the lightbulb companies, the camera manufactures will always create better products that leave the older cameras, feeling, well, older. This does not mean you can't create the content you wanted though, as most DSLRs will certainly do this just fine.

As technology and speed to develop products improves, it's better to wait a few years to upgrade. Be happy with what you have now.

Cost is a significant factor when it comes to objectively upgrading your kit. If you want the best camera, you'll be looking at something like the Sony Venice 2, which is currently priced at an exorbitant $60K, without even factoring in the required extras or lenses. You only need this camera if you are making a film for the big screen.

Learning a new system takes time, and mastering it to get the camera working exactly how you want it to takes even longer. Additionally, newer models that offer 6k/8k filming require a significant amount of storage space, which can be very expensive and time-consuming to manage.

But perhaps the most crucial point to consider is whether the upgrades actually make a noticeable difference to the end-user. Unless you're making content for the cinema, 8k/6k/4k resolutions are no where even noticeable on mobile devices.

So, why bother upgrading it if it won't make a difference to your audience?

I've come to realise that many people get caught up in arguments over technology specs, especially in the Youtube comments, often forgetting about the content itself. Until SSDs become more affordable, and more people install 8k projectors to watch Youtube, I will be content with what I have.

If you're curious about my current kit, you can take a look at it here. It's likely all I'll ever need.

In the near future, DSLRs will likely become as outdated, and new technologies will take over.

But until then, I'm happy to not upgrade my kit and focus on creating content that resonates with my audience, as ultimately that's all that matters.