Myth No. 1 - Equipment doesn't matter

We've all heard it - "it's not the camera, it's the guy behind the camera that counts" and "a better camera won't make you a better photographer". Also "You never hear painters discussing the effect of their brushes, why should we discuss cameras?" and the one about the non-enthusiasts whose only apparant praise for photographers is "You take such good pictures, you must have a good camera". Well, like all myths, they're founded on truth but aren't actually true in themselves. OK, it's certainly true that almost any film camera of today will produce technically better results than ever before, and the same is true within the digital world (for a comparison of the two, you'll have to wait for another Myth) - and it's also true that artistic vision is absolutely critical. HOWEVER, just stop for a moment to consider certain photographers and the equipment they used - and why. Ansel Adams (who will be the subject of a future myth all of his own) used a large format camera for a very good reason - it was the appropriate tool to translate his vision onto film. Same goes for Henri Cartier-Bresson (another future Myth) and his Leica, and Colin Prior and his Fuji panoramic - without the appropriate tool, none of them could have realised their pictures. So don't tell me the camera doesn't matter - it plainly does.