MichiDigger
Full Member
Several years ago, I got very heavily into photography. I read books. I watched videos. I made it my business to learn photography as well as I could. I purchased an entry-level DSLR, a Nikon D-5100. It would be comparable to a new detectorist buying a Garrett Ace 200. I practiced and continue to learn.
I eventually got to the point where I started producing really good photographs, if I say so myself. When showing my photographs I would frequently get the comment, “Wow! You must have a really nice camera!”
I would just chuckled and agree. What people don’t realize is that you can take a professional photographer with a very inexpensive camera and they will consistently produce a better product than a beginner with the most expensive camera. Many people simply cannot appreciate the fact that quality results are often a product of many years of learning, research and practice.
It seems to me that the same principles hold true with detecting. Most machines essentially do the same thing and it really falls down to the experience level and personal preference of the individual user. Would you agree?
I eventually got to the point where I started producing really good photographs, if I say so myself. When showing my photographs I would frequently get the comment, “Wow! You must have a really nice camera!”
I would just chuckled and agree. What people don’t realize is that you can take a professional photographer with a very inexpensive camera and they will consistently produce a better product than a beginner with the most expensive camera. Many people simply cannot appreciate the fact that quality results are often a product of many years of learning, research and practice.
It seems to me that the same principles hold true with detecting. Most machines essentially do the same thing and it really falls down to the experience level and personal preference of the individual user. Would you agree?