If you make money by taking pictures, isn't it an investment to buy a camera, granted that you'll make money with it?

@AlexandreVaillancourt Thus the qualification "... or expect it to generate revenue..." Having said that, though, I know plenty of working pros who would never call a gear expense an "investment". For the most part they spend as little as they must absolutely have to spend to get the images they need to get, and they bitch like crazy about how much everything "costs", not about the "level of investment" a piece of gear requires.

@AlexandreVaillancourt Thus the qualification "... or expect it to generate revenue..." Having said that, though, I know plenty of working pros who would never call a gear expense an "investment". For the most part they spend as little as they must absolutely have to spend to get the images they need to get, and they bitch like crazy about how "expensive" stuff is or how much everything "costs", not about the "level of investment" a piece of gear requires.

By some bookkeeping terminology, "investment" is a subset of "expense." What you're describing as a "cost" can also be called an "investment in equipment." But that's financial jargon, not common idiom.

Still, it's difficult to make absolute statements about the proper use of language, doubly so in English and triply so when jargon is involved.

@MichaelClark I see your point.

@BESW What you say still requires the usage to be in the context of a schedule C or similar balance sheet for a business. If you are familiar with tax law then I'm sure you are aware that although one must declare income derived from a hobby (as defined by the tax code), one may NOT deduct expenses from that same activity if it meets the definition of "hobby."

I'm not intimately familiar with tax law in that regard. Just sayin', idiom and jargon allow for many different uses of words with both specific and general meanings, even before we get into regional variances and linguistic confusion.

"Investment" doesn't have to have the extremely specific connotations you're insisting on.

It sounds like you've had some particular experience with one or more people using it in the context of misunderstanding finance, but that doesn't mean everyone who uses it in an unfamiliar way is making the same mistake.

And like I said, the guys that can write it off on their balance sheet aren't normally the ones calling cameras, lenses, huge monitors, etc. "investments."

@BESW Most well respected English dictionaries limit the usage to the outlay of capital with the expectation of return (or the capital itself once it is outlayed, or the asset purchased with an expectation of gaining return). merriam-webster.com/dictionary/investment

Then we're talking at cross purposes and I'm sorry for taking your time.

dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/investment

@BESW Sorry to confuse you with the facts.

@BESW Michael is correct that for something to fit the definition of "investment" it needs to be expected to yield a return in excess of the invested resources. It doesn't have to actually perform (a bad investment) and in general usage it doesn't necessarily have to yield financial returns directly. Time is generally a component as well as it is expected to be a recovery over time of the initially larger investment.

I would, however, argue that one could "invest" in a new TV if the amount of enjoyment they would get from that TV over time is worth more to them than the financial cost of it. Especially if they can map it to financials (for example, I bought my TV by factoring in how much I would save on movies I could watch at home instead of in theaters.)

I suppose it still indirectly links back to financial return though, because most of the time I'm applying valuations to things to calculate if it is a good investment of resources

to maximize benefit for resources consumed

it wouldn't meet the terms of "investment" in the business sense though

I think that's where the difference comes in is what level of indirect financial benefit you can entertain

for example, if you were to say that the difference in enjoyment between current TV A and new TV B is $5 an hour, then how many hours do you need to use the new TV for it to be worth acquiring, and does that make it a good purchase. It isn't a valid business expense since you are still deriving the benefit for yourself, but one could easily argue it is still an investment in the general sense since it is still generating a return relative to your valuation of your time and experience.

where as I wouldn't say something like paying the power bill could be considered an investment as I don't have any way to say I expect to get more back out of it than I put in. I'm just paying for a consumable that I need to do other things I want to do. There's no additional forward benefit after the cost is consumed that can outweigh the cost

even in indirect terms

now, that said, I also still tend to agree with him in application to lenses where it is not going to be used commercially. It depends on the cost, but generally it's pretty hard to justify unless you use it an exceptionally large amount or put an exceptionally high value on having it. I would tend to classify them more as a necessary outlay for a tool I want to be able to work with than something I can realistically say was worth it in terms of long term benefit to me

I could try to argue indirectly via the amount I'd save over having images taken by a portrait studio, but at the same time I wouldn't have that many photos at a portrait studio

but then again, that's also why I didn't get a really good camera until I had a means of paying for it by using it

Are there cameras that you can control via a mobile app?

I mean, is it a thing? I though I've seen someone doing that, but again, I'm not sure it was that...

@AlexandreVaillancourt yes, there are anything from ones you can directly control that are designed to use an app as the viewfinder to ones that are using things like remote shooting

don't see as many of the earlier category anymore, but they were more popular before cellphone cameras got as good as they are now

I have software on my phone that will let me control my 5D mark iii via tethered shooting

there are atleast one or two canon dslrs that offer wireless tether over wifi as well

@AJHenderson That's fascinating! Do you happen to know what ppl use it for or how do they use it, mainly?

I've used it for some time lapse control before I got my actual intervolometer

it can be useful for seeing what you are about to capture when away from the camera as a visual remote too

the earlier category was good for saving money by having a camera with minimal processing, no storage and no screen

but letting someone use their phone as the "brains" of a camera

I guess you could do much more complex stuff with the phone, like letting the user do what they want with it!

Can "yet" be used as in "Have you subscribed to my channel yet?"

@EuriPinhollow yes