Originally Posted by newtogolf
Originally Posted by Spitfisher
They are not playing football, so they can not be compared can they, if so I know people who work in the garden all day and its far cheaper tha golf and rewarding too, for some.
Like anything, gardening can be quite expensive too. A hobby is something people find enjoyable and decide to dedicate their time and some disposable income to. I know some people that find photography very rewarding, one uses a cheap point and shoot digital camera ($100), while the other has over $15,000 worth of gear. They both take great pictures and love doing it.
If you love golf you can buy a few clubs and play, Seve and Hogan are two examples of people who did quite well in golf with a very small financial investment.
All else being equal, that person with the $100 P&S is going to be limited to a very narrow range of images (although there are some high end P&S cameras _in the $500-$600 range - which can approach the capabilities of an entry level DSLR), and they can never be brought up to the level of the guy with DSLR, That is a simple fact. It's the same as saying that a golfer using one club can never score as well as one using a full set, skill level being equal. In both cases case the equipment is a limiting factor.
But that doesn't rule out buying on the used market, for both golf and photography. I can find outstanding deals on 4 or 5 year old used, and even refurbished, cameras and lenses. A person can get a solid DSLR with a good lens for $350, and never spend another dime (assuming that he has a computer to download the photos to) and have most of the capabilities of the guy who spent $15000. The same is true of golf. A set of good clubs can be had for a song with a little patience and research. However, the spending doesn't stop there, as it costs money simply to play, even if you only use found balls and tees (I don't count extras like gloves because they aren't actually necessary). So even low budget golf actually does require more of an ongoing investment than even a frugal approach to a fairly high level of photography.
I've been an amateur photographer for as long as I've played golf. I currently have at least 5 times more invested in photography equipment than I do in golf. The reason is that I can't play golf down here, but I can take pictures. When I was still in Colorado, I had a $200 P&S after I gave up on film shooting, but I was playing golf every moment that I could get on the course. I'm fortunate to have two such hobbies which I can mix and match, but I've had to channel my discretionary spending into one or the other, never both at the same time. As I mentioned way back at the start of this discussion, for most of us, budgeting is necessary to make everything work.