Two Body vs Two Lens Kit

[KanzaKruzer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How many of you use a two body solution rather than carrying an extra lens and switching in the field? One example could include an M240 paired with a 28/2 and an M246 paired with a 50/2. Adding a second body for added capability and allowing focal length flexibility.

 

I really enjoy using the OVF, but do not find the EVF on the M240 user friendly. Enough so that I just sold my 21/3.4 on FM and still have my 90/2 listed. I'm using the funds from the sale of these two lenses to buy an A7sII and two lens kit including a Batis 25/2 and Batis 85/1.8. I really enjoy using the 35/1.4 and 50/2 with the M240 OVF. It is fast and accurate. I plan to carry the M240 with the 50/2 attached and the A7sII with the 25/2 attached. Lets me enjoy the OVF with the M240 while gaining low light and autofocus capability with the A7sII. On occasion I may shoot with the M240 and 35/1.4 paired with the A7sII and 85/1.8. Hopefully the two body solution will work better for me.

 

The closest examples I have seen on this website are those carrying both the M240 and M246. I also see a lot of two lens kit paring like the 28/50, 35/90, etc. What situations do two bodies excel at and what problems should I expect?

Edited September 21, 2015 by KanzaKruzer

[FrozenInTime]

Two bodies represents the classic reportage practice where a shot would be missed fumbling lens changes.

In the digital era changing lenses frequently introduces the chances of introducing dust to the sensor.

Two bodies also represents a backup strategy should one fail ; run out of film or batteries at a wrong time.

 

However when just walking around, with no criticality in what you are capturing, the simplicity a single body has it's rewards.

 

This year my preferences have , on different occasions, been:

 

M9+MM 35+50  ( indoors - fast lenses )

M9+35 ( hillwalking )

M6+MA  28+50 ( walking about town )

MA+35 ( walking about town )

MA+28+50+90 ( tourist exploration )

0-series + Ricoh GR ( light travel )

Edited September 21, 2015 by FrozenInTime

[ramarren]

I change lenses relatively infrequently, so the notion of carrying a whole second body and lens for the infrequent moments when I want to switch lenses seems overkill. 

 

G

[douglas fry]

This is a good question and something I'm going to address this week. At the wedding on Saturday I used nearly all day the 50mm on the M240 and the 35mm ASPH on the Sony and it was a good combination, I used the 21mm from time to time on the Sony too. 

 

Depending on on the day my other pairing is the 90mm on the Sony and a 35 on the M240. My only issue is that to change from one form factor to another is annoying, and I much prefer shooting on the rangefinder. It was this awkward change on form factor that 'helped' me drop my 90mm last week and take a chip out of the front lens element (aargh)

 

So to answer your question then yes for my wedding work it would be sensible to use two similar cameras, it would help with consistent post processing too. For my corporate work during the week, it doesn't matter so much as its at a slower pace, and a lens change is no issue.

[250swb]

The 'classic' necessity of carrying two bodies was when a far larger jump in focal length was needed than 28-50, for that you can often make up the difference by walking, or cropping, especially in reportage. And not forgetting zoom lenses were in their infancy and not very good. So the 'classic' setup may be a 35mm lens on a Leica and a 135mm lens on a Nikon, and photographers could get their heads around it, even the different direction of focus, because there was no other interference, such as camera menu's. The other classic reason would be using colour film in one and B&W in the other.

 

Other than a pocket P&S the dichotomy for a modern amateur of carrying two separate types of body, or two of the same, is that it is lazy not to simply change a lens, but it isn't lazy lugging two cameras around that serve essentially the same purpose. If you don't want to change lenses buy either a better pair of shoes, or buy a zoom lens, and carry one camera, because I think it's almost guaranteed that the main usage will fall on the most convenient camera to use, not equally or fall on the best camera for the job, it's human nature. Photography is an intellectual game, decide on the camera you need before leaving the house, don't take a selection in the hope one will work better than another because it will cause intellectual fog.

 

Steve

Edited September 21, 2015 by 250swb

[douglas fry]

For speed, its much quicker to just swing up the other camera and shoot, and faster still if its the same make of camera. As Steve says though if you are walking around a city (or the Peak District)  shooting then a 50mm on the camera and a 35mm (etc)  in your pocket is the lightest option if you feel you do need a change of lens at some point.

[GLAUMAX]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On travel, I always use two bodies (two M8.2) with a wide angle (equivalent 24 or 28mm) on the first body and a 50mm or 90 mm on the second body.

It works for me.

Before I had a M8 (or M-E) and a Fuji X100 but I didn't like the fact that the ergonomics were different. Sold the M-E to purchase a second M8.2 and it sounds perfect to me.

[TomB_tx]

For decades my big kit was a film M for 35 to 90, and an SLR (SL or R4) for 90 and up (or macro). Now with digital I tend to carry a single camera and lens, but the same functional division: M9 for 35-50, A7 for 20, macro, or long lens.

[mustafasoleiman]

Always used two M bodies, one with a 35, the other with a 90 (recently though I switched the 90 with a 50)... Then if I need or can, I will carry a third body which used to be a Nikon F and now is a Sony Nex 6, with a 12, which becomes an 18, and a 135, which becomes a 200... The only thing I then wish i had the strength to carry is my hasselblad with two lenses...

[bocaburger]

I always traveled with 2 M film bodies, for several reasons.  First there was backup in case of breakdown.  Then there was using different ISO's and/or slide and print and/or b&w and color.  Finally and least important to me was having 2 focal lengths at hand.  I say least important because I carry 4-5 lenses and half the time the lens I wanted wasn't on one of the bodies at that moment anyway. 

 

With the switch to the M8, I no longer needed a second body for ISO or color vs b&w.  Backup was important, but given the cost and quick depreciation of a second body, I decided to go with a smaller, lighter, cheaper backup option.  First was a P&S, then a Panny G1 with M adapter. I ended up never having to use them.

 

When I got an M9, I debated keeping the M8 as a second body.  But it was still worth strong money at the time, there was the difference in crop, plus the need to stick with IR filters.  So I sold it and continued to carry the G1 as backup.

 

When I got an M240, I decided not to keep the M9 as the sensor issue was yet unresolved, there is a difference in frame line calibration, different batteries and chargers.  The G1 was getting a bit long in the tooth so I picked up a closeout Nex 6, which is small and has an internal charger for the battery. 

 

Quite fortuitously I stumbled upon a great deal on a second M240 and decided I liked the output and design enough that I probably would not upgrade for a long time, so I splurged and am back to carrying 2 bodies.  But the size and weight of M bodies has grown a lot since my M4, and it goes double with two of them in the bag.  So quite often when I travel, one body stays in the hotel safe.

[Herr Barnack]

I tend to not change lenses a lot.  When I arrive at the scene or situation I am going to photograph, I look things over and make a judgement call regarding what focal length to use.  I will then shoot with that lens until I have wrung out every possible image from the scene.  If there are images that call for a longer or shorter lens, I will change lenses and work with that focal length.  This approach works well for me, but everyone has their own methodology.

 

When I travel, I take a film M as a backup to my M-P since I do not have a second digital M.  When i shot film 100%, I would take two M bodies when traveling; the second body was a safety net and I used my the method of shooting described above.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Carlos Danger

[uhoh7]

Fairly recently I have taken to using two bodies, M9 and A7.mod. I might use the 28 cron on the M9 and 50 cron on the A7.mod. It's very nice, and makes for a far more fluid shooting walk.

 

But when weight counts I go back to single body.

 

With 2 bodies you do stand out a bit more as a camera geek.

[Manoleica]

Mostly I carry - M-P240 Safari/35mm Cron ASPH + XVario or V-Lux4

X1 is great as a lightweight with the Safari... 

[Echo63]

Two bodies is faster to switch, if you are often in situations where you need to, it also reduces the chances of dust/rain/snow/sand getting into the sensor chamber or a lens being dropped.

 

At work i have a pair of 1DX one with a 24-70 and the other with a 70-200 - it works well for some of what i do (news, bands, sport etc) but i do frequently just get one body out of the bag (portraits)

 

if i am shooting with my M, i am out relaxing - i don't need to rush to change lenses, i can take my time (i also can't afford a second body, or a second lens - other than my Olympus Zuiko 28f2.8 on an adapter)

it all depends on how you shoot and what you shoot.

[yef]

daily use : M240 with a nokton 50mm f/1.1 and a M9 with a summicron 35mm asph. 

 

for news: M9 with 40mm c summicron and a 28mm asph. in the bag / canon d6 with 70-300 L lens

 

personal projects: M240 with Nokton 50 f/1.1 (or M6) and a Linhof Master Technika 5x7

[james.liam]

I regularly use an alternate 2-body kit:

 

MM v.1 + 50 Summilux ASPH

 

Ricoh GR (28mm equiv.)

[colint544]

Probably slightly off-topic, but after a couple of years of obsessively carrying my M Monochrom mk1 and anything up to three lenses everywhere with me, I've spent the past year shooting exclusively black and white film.

 

I went from an M2 plus 50mm Summilux ASPH, plus 28mm Summicron ASPH to my current set-up: M5 and M2, with just the 50mm Summilux ASPH between them. Somehow I find the two body, one lens outfit MORE flexible because I can put slow film for daytime in one body, and fast film for poor light in the other body. There's a 'look' to the pictures because they're all shot on the 50.

 

i daresay this setup will change again in the future. I still have the M Monochrom, but currently rarely use it. Ilford HP5 pushed two stops is nowhere as sharp as the M Monochrom, but it gives pictures an atmosphere that digital, for me, currently can't hold a candle to.

 

I think my point is that it's nice to have options. 

 

Best wishes and happy new year, all,

 

Coin

[colint544]

Link: http://colintempleton.tumblr.com/post/129935930864/colin-templeton-this-past-year-ive-been

[hepcat]

If I'm working, I carry my M9P, lenses, and a Fuji X-T1 with an 18-135WS zoom and m-mount adapter.   That gives me lots of options.  If I'm just vacationing, I'll take either the Fuji or the M9P as the mood strikes me.  I don't do the two-body solution with digital.  It makes sense with film as you can shoot b&w AND color, and/or two different ISOs of film.  With digital, an extra lens is a lot easier to carry than two bodies and just as versatile.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Schrödinger's cat]

Obviously, I can only speak for myself, but I would have to evaluate this issue in light of what, where, how, and why you are photographing.  My requirements don't necessarily translate to anyone else requirements, so a bit of background:

 

For a couple of decades I traveled carrying pretty much everything I owned.  My physical condition was such that I was perfectly ok spending 12 hours walking around the back of beyond in 90 something degree heat and everything was fine.   Today, while I still photograph the same things in the back of beyond, the prospect of carrying the same equipment would probably cause me to just cancel the trip

 

We spend a lot of time wandering the usual tourist destinations as well and travel exclusively by tube, bus and sometimes overnight train.  Weight, bulk, and equipment security are an issue.  We limit ourselves to one carry-on size backpack each, and no checked luggage.  Every ounce left home is an ounce we don't have to fool with when reaching our destination.  We find that the lack of some particular piece of equipment which might improve a particular photograph is much less a concern than the freedom of movement and convenience of dragging less stuff around.  So, one body/one lens each.  Lately, being a relatively newcomer to Leica and having abandoned the weight/bulk of my Nikons, I have stretched that to one lens on the camera and one in my pocket.  I don't find that I am missing much and have gained significant mobility.

 

Even when I was carrying a lot more stuff around, I found that carrying two cameras around my neck was a really bad deal.  I visited a lot of archaeological sites and two bodies just meant I had two very expensive cameras banging together or scraping on the rocks.  I was very uncomfortable with two bodies even then.  I suppose if you are doing such things for pay then it's a different situation, but I hated it. If you are photographing relatively close to home or perhaps stashing stuff in the trunk of your car you might be perfectly ok.

 

It's very common to read about someone carrying a backup camera in case something goes wrong with their main body.  Ok, fair enough.  Except I can't recall off hand someone writing about their only camera going Tango Uniform and ruining their vacation.  I suppose there's always some poor soul who's strap breaks and his camera falls in the public toilet in the capital of Mongolia, but until my own experiences prove me wrong I'll take the risk of only one body  (following that line of thinking to it's logical conclusion, being clumsy I suspect I'd probably be more likely to drop a camera in a Mongolian toilet if I were carrying two of them, but whatever )

 

I recommend carrying the very minimum stuff and concentrating on the moment.  In my personal view you will have a much more productive trip and your back won't hurt as much afterward.  YMMV.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Schrödinger's cat