Why are we never happy?

I’m forever buying new cameras, and selling my old ones, hoping that I’ll discover the ideal one. Haven’t found it yet, but still searching! Others the same?

I'm happy with my current gear, and have no plans to add more. At this time, of course. No one knows what the future holds.

Brain chemical imbalance.

Research shows that technology addiction may be related to a change in brain structure, such as the brain's prefrontal lobe, which is responsible for prioritizing life tasks.

Not a joke…
Purchasing new cameras with new technology and new features will never make you happy.
Seek professional advice if this is having a serious effect on your well-being or finances.

fyi... there are many photographers of all “calibers” on YouTube that are taking amazing photographs with ten dollar film cameras.

A guy walks into a music store and asks…
‘which piano will make me sound like Beethoven?’

Not me. I found a camera that could be ideal if it hadn't many shortcomings mainly in the User Interface department: the Sony RX10 M3. I started with the M1 about a decade ago and kept waiting for either Sony improving on it or another brand releasing a competing product, in vain. Then I got the M3 which is way better but still imperfect. Yet I got used to it to a certain extent. I even consider getting the M4 since it seems there is no chance a real contender will arrive. AFAIK this line of bridges was never very successful in spite of their real qualities.
So I make do with a camera that's excellent in many respects, that has no real competitor, but irritates me in quite some ways. The beauty of the situation is that I don't spend much.
You obviously belong to category of people with a kind of addiction to getting gears. As long as that kind of behavior has no or little impact on your well-being, relationships and finance I don't see a problem.
Nick

Quite happy with my Z 6. Thing is, I worked to understand the factors and mechanisms behind my particular needs, and bought gear specifically to meet them. Now, I'd like good super-zoom and 105mm macro lenses, but that's also because I understand my needs...

For a while, although not "new cameras" - just later models. But now I'm "retro"-oriented with only four cameras:

First Sigma DSLR SD9
First Lumix LX model LX-1
First Lumix micro four-thirds G1

I've kept the Lumix DC-G9 - on of the finest stills cameras on the planet in my price range ...

I perfectly happy as long as I have something to complain about...

I used to be like you, ever since the 1980s. I stopped doing that a while back. I'm perfectly happy with my two D750s and a D7200 (plus the amazingly light and capable D3500) and about 12 cherry-picked F-mount lenses..

Thom Hogan calls this the 'Last Camera Syndrome'. I always wondered, why would it be it a 'Syndrome' for me? For me, it's the 'Last Camera Revelation' as I do not need to constantly shell out money anymore and there's no need to try to keep informed about the last greatest thing hyped on the Internet, which just goes on and on anyway, whatever.

Of course, for the manufacturers (and others that build a business on ever-changing gear), I can see that people willingly stopping to buy the latest iteration of gear manifests itself as a 'syndrome'. For them that is, not for us, the buyers.

Well, I'm pretty happy. But more/better is always welcome. However, tech has gotten to a point where there are systems out nowadays where, if someone said, "I'll get you everything you want on the condition you never get anything else until it breaks" that I'd take them up on that offer.

Hi,

I've been pretty content lately. A pairing of a Nikon Df plus a Pentax 645D. The Df since 2018. Wasn't enough resolution for large prints of some things, so I added the used Pentax gear.

Before that, it was a three camera setup. All Kodak. 720x for low light. 760c for the main use. Contax 645 plus a Pro Back. That's 2 MP and 6 MP and 16 MP respectively. Note, too that went only as high as 16 MP so that Df replaced all three. And they were here from 2003-2018.

Before those there were a lot of cameras. Nikon E2, E3, D1, D1H, D1X, D2H (in order) plus Canon 1D and 1Ds. I was looking for something to replace film. That was from 1999 to 2003. Before then, film was both 135 with Nikon and 645 with Mamiya.

I did finally get there. Took me only 20 years.....

And it's 135 and 645 formats once more. ;)

The only thing tempting out there is the Fujifilm GFX 100s. I don't need 100 MP, but that sensor has far less aliasing than the 50 MP one. But it's still more money than I want to spend. Eventually.....

Stan

According to the Buddha (500BC), desire to better photo camera and ignorance about photography lie at the root of suffering. These both lead to craving and attachment to things that are impermanent unimportant, and this attachment causes us to suffer, because we hold onto a false belief that new equipment will bring us lasting happiness. ;)

(Buddha look at new fuji cameras and read rumours about sony a6700) )))

Excellent!

I'm happy because today with digital it's easy to spend <$1000 for used gear that (with a little PP) will blow away the resolution and color saturation of the finest iconic film cameras. Keeping to lenses between, say, 28mm and 135mm lets one stay in that budget.

It's chasing the edge cases like ultrawide and serious telephoto that can trigger neuroses. But I imprinted upon the great film photogs who made their careers with only a limited range of focal lengths.

Not just cameras. But indeed. It is though a willful approach of the companies too, to never give you all the goodies, for reasonable price anyways. On top of your proclivity for this, they arrange the world for this to happen too.

I think it is good exercise to pick a choice, and run with it for some time, because if you are never happy, you might as well continue using the stuff you have, unhappily anyways.

For me - no.
My aim is to get out, to take photos with what I have - and to share the best images with others.
Often getting a good image is less than 15% down to the equipment used.

Not really. I've switched systems exactly once (from Canon EF/EF-S to m4/3) after testing the smaller format out and finding it met my needs better. I still have one of the first m4/3 cameras I ever bought (GF2, now full spectrum conversion) and I've done a few upgrades over the years when there was a compelling reason to do so (G2 to GH3, GH3 to GH5, GF2 to E-M5III for full spectrum conversions). I've selected lenses carefully and aside from one kit zoom I parted with when I sold the G2 I've never sold any of the lenses I've picked up.

At some point there will be a compelling reason for me to replace the GH5 but that reason has yet to arrive.

No. I am not much afflicted with gear lust, I doubt I even know all the tricks hidden in my four year old m43 camera. I haven't bought a lens in years but there is a lens I'd like to have so I don't rule out that I might buy another. I'm more interested in seeing what I can find to do with what I have that I haven't thought of before. I'd also rather spend discretionary money on travel than gear.

Photography is a hobby than encompasses several sub hobbies. There are those whose primary interest is the equipment, those whose primary interest is the activity of shooting (kinda like hunting), those who are primarily interested in the final image, those who are interested in what they can do with the pixels they gather in post. Most of us have a bit of mix of these interests but we lean towards one or two. Whichever sub hobby we most relate to will determine what our frustrations and unhappinesses derive from. Mine comes from lack of creative ideas, and snazzy new cameras and lenses wouldn't solve that.