>>4001969About half my family are full time artists in other industries (graphic design, painting, and textiles mostly). They all have preferences for certain brands / models for various things, and in some cases certain gear is absolutely required, but they aren't really "gear" focused at all. One has a beefy computer they need for large scale design work, but they still spend most of their time working with a pencil and paper.
I feel like once you get to a certain point of competency as an artist, you should be able to get the results you want independent of the gear. A good musician might still prefer a "nicer" guitar, for a variety of reasons, but they should be able to make awesome music even with a "mediocre" guitar. Likewise, give a beginner musician something top of the line, and it's still gonna sound bad.
I would feel comfortable using pretty much any brand / system nowadays for a wedding / elopement (what I focus on). There are some instances where the gear might actually be a limitation (not enough resolution for giant print, limited access to "wildlife" lenses like with Fuji, etc), but most good photographers should be able to put out good work, regardless of the system used. If someone had to downgrade from a D850 to a D800 or even D750, it really shouldn't "make or break" a photo.
All that said, there are obvious benefits to nicer gear, and in many cases they make it significantly easier to get the results you want. I'm in a weird position now where I can afford any gear I want, but I've found myself actually using less and less. Honestly, all I need are 2 bodies, a 24-35mm ish f1.4/2 prime, and a 50-85mm ish f1.4/f2 prime, and that covers 99% of what I shoot personally and professionally. Despite that, I own like 6 bodies and +20 lenses. Most photos I really enjoy, were taken with much worse gear than I have now. When I see a mediocre photo, and think if that photo had been taken with better gear, it 99% wouldn't really make a big difference.
