Jump to content

How many bodies


mustafasoleiman

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

we always discuss how many lenses we have or should have, but never how many bodies that go with them and how we can juggle so many lenses with the bodies we have.

 

I find changing a lens one of the most disruptive and time consuming task, let alone the chance of dropping the lens and or loosing the image I wanted to take.

 

Furthermore dust will creep into the body and the weather might as well not help!

 

All in all another body may go very well towards allowing you to take that extra image.

 

And did I mention laziness?

 

This is what I have come up with:

 

For the first time in all my picture taking life, which must now be 45 years, I bought a second M6 body last year with a view of being able to have 2 different speeds of B&W film loaded. I am not sure this is totally necessary in my case and I will consider selling one of them in the near future. But I guess one has to try these things to realise.

 

Modern society has a more is better attitude which I must say I have been guilty of subscribing to. Having recently gone down this route recently by owning 2 wristwatches when in fact I can only wear one at once. So the process of returning to the singular in all things has been very liberating

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Having recently gone down this route recently by owning 2 wristwatches when in fact I can only wear one at once

 

Then again you only use one toilet roll at a time even though they tend to come in packs of 2 or more. There is however a reassurance that should one unexpectedly end there is another to take its place. So it is with cameras when one body fails and you are lucky enough to have a backup waiting to be pressed into service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then again you only use one toilet roll at a time even though they tend to come in packs of 2 or more. There is however a reassurance that should one unexpectedly end there is another to take its place. So it is with cameras when one body fails and you are lucky enough to have a backup waiting to be pressed into service.

 

In 45 years I have never had a camera fail but your toilet roll analogy is a very valid one and having been caught with my pants down I have in that case been very grateful for a second roll

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a true tale of a toilet in Turkey that still troubles me today. I exaggerate for the sake of alliteration, but at the time it wasn't funny. There's nothing like walking with clenched buttocks for 200 metres only to find out where you ended up was no better than where you started.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a true tale of a toilet in Turkey that still troubles me today. I exaggerate for the sake of alliteration, but at the time it wasn't funny. There's nothing like walking with clenched buttocks for 200 metres only to find out where you ended up was no better than where you started.

 

I have had a very similar experience in an alpine hut and I don't need to tell you how desperate that is, but we digress

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Ms and 2 Rs.

 

I have an MP and M6 that I nearly always carry together. I now very rarely carry only one body, and then only when photography is not the primarly activity and the camera is "just in case." I'm looking to add a 3rd M body before too long.

 

When I travel, I take the Ms, the R8 with motor and possibly the SL2 as well. Lens changes with the Rs are more cumbersome than with the Ms, so arguably one would need more bodies, but the bulk and weight become limiting factors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a true tale of a toilet in Turkey that still troubles me today. I exaggerate for the sake of alliteration, but at the time it wasn't funny. There's nothing like walking with clenched buttocks for 200 metres only to find out where you ended up was no better than where you started.

 

Is that what they mean by a Turkey trot, Steve...? :D

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to get off the bog, and back on topic, I've got an R8, an R9 and a CM.

 

The R8 is loaded with Superia Extra 400, and has my 28-90 zoom attached, so tends to be my holiday and (non-specifically-photographic excursions) camera. The R9 is loaded with Reala, and goes out with tripod, prime lenses and the general whole works.

 

The CM is of course my pocket camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to carry as a third body, beside my two M6s, an old and battered Nikon F to use with a 200mm.

 

Now that the 135mm is effectively a 180 I have swapped the third body for a M8, on which I alternate a 12cv.

 

I agree the M8/135 is not as efficient as a dsrl but it does get the far images I want and it adds the convenience of acting as a backup.

 

Did anybody go this route or the dslr is still the favourite choice when going long (in a M system at least)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree that the 135 (tele-Elmar in my case) makes an excellent telephoto on an M8.

 

So, for me the M8 is one body, and I have trimmed down to a M6 and a R6, for film bodies. I really cannot justify more than one film body for each system. The M8 gets used the most, it is my constant companion.......it goes everywhere with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever happened to understatement? To "less is more"..? :rolleyes:

 

Are we to "measure" each other by the size of our gadget bags now...?

 

Boys and their toys... *shakes head*

 

I have found that, no matter how hard I try, I can only look through one viewfinder at a time...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Totally agree Bill in fact I am thinking of offloading my spare M6

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to carry as a third body, beside my two M6s, an old and battered Nikon F to use with a 200mm.

 

Now that the 135mm is effectively a 180 I have swapped the third body for a M8, on which I alternate a 12cv.

 

I agree the M8/135 is not as efficient as a dsrl but it does get the far images I want and it adds the convenience of acting as a backup.

 

Did anybody go this route or the dslr is still the favourite choice when going long (in a M system at least)?

 

I do the exact same thing with the 135APO as I often shoot near water and need the reach. Working kit is two bodies and 3-4 lenses depending on the situation. For some events I use the DMR with the 180apo and the 1.4apo extender and an M8 for wide thru 90. This produces the images but is less seemless when working.

 

The 135apo lets me travel without the DMR for most trips.

 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever happened to understatement? To "less is more"..? :rolleyes:

 

Are we to "measure" each other by the size of our gadget bags now...?

 

Boys and their toys... *shakes head*

 

I have found that, no matter how hard I try, I can only look through one viewfinder at a time...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Whatever happened to 'live and let live,' and 'to each their own,' and 'different strokes for different folks?'

 

I can match cliche's with the best of them. The world would be a boring place if we were all the same. What has amazed me about some Leica owners is the extreme intolerance for different points of view or opinions. Everyone has their own, and their opinion is right, and everyone else is wrong, so it seems sometimes.

 

Leica owners seem to fall on a continuum between the minimalist shooter and the collector. Most of us fall somewhere in the murky middle.

 

For those advocates of one camera and one lens, I can appreciate the position and understand the benefits, but I believe two points about such shooters: One, they've never had camera fail in their hands. Let that happen once, and the benefits of having a second camera are self-evident, and justified. And two, they're typically shooting people, and usually around home. Any type of travel photography typically requires a bit more. And birds and bees and buildings require more.

 

I went to St. Petersburg Russia last summer and I was in my minimalist mode so I only took one rangefinder and a 35mm lens. I got plenty of great shots, but I missed more then 'a boat load' (another cliche'!) by not having something wider and longer.

 

After years of photography, it really comes down to a question of use. 'If you need it get it, but if you don't use it, get rid of it,' and that's paraphrased cliche'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that most people who need to rely on their kit have two bodies... what is interesting is that then the number tends to jump from two to four, rather than three.

 

Now my next question is how do you use all these bodies?

 

 

 

 

Personally, I have two DMRs because I do this for a living and have to have a back-up body, always. As for the two M6TTLs, I use them to photograph weddings--one loaded with B+W, one with Color.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that most people who need to rely on their kit have two bodies... what is interesting is that then the number tends to jump from two to four, rather than three.

 

Now my next question is how do you use all these bodies?

 

 

 

 

Personally, I have two DMRs because I do this for a living and have to have a back-up body, always. As for the two M6TTLs, I use them to photograph weddings--one loaded with B+W, one with Color.

 

What I was actually asking is what combination of lenses go with the bodies one does carry around for use...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever happened to 'live and let live,' and 'to each their own,' and 'different strokes for different folks?'

 

I can match cliche's with the best of them. The world would be a boring place if we were all the same. What has amazed me about some Leica owners is the extreme intolerance for different points of view or opinions. Everyone has their own, and their opinion is right, and everyone else is wrong, so it seems sometimes.

 

Leica owners seem to fall on a continuum between the minimalist shooter and the collector. Most of us fall somewhere in the murky middle.

 

For those advocates of one camera and one lens, I can appreciate the position and understand the benefits, but I believe two points about such shooters: One, they've never had camera fail in their hands. Let that happen once, and the benefits of having a second camera are self-evident, and justified. And two, they're typically shooting people, and usually around home. Any type of travel photography typically requires a bit more. And birds and bees and buildings require more.

 

I went to St. Petersburg Russia last summer and I was in my minimalist mode so I only took one rangefinder and a 35mm lens. I got plenty of great shots, but I missed more then 'a boat load' (another cliche'!) by not having something wider and longer.

 

After years of photography, it really comes down to a question of use. 'If you need it get it, but if you don't use it, get rid of it,' and that's paraphrased cliche'.

 

And believe me I do envy those who carry one small HQ camera with a 20 to 500mm f2 zoom, with the certainty that nothing will ever go wrong... What a load would it it be off my back (to paraphrase another cliche') AND my wallet!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two M8s for the same reason I have (for now) two lungs and two kidneys - redundancy. If one stops working, I'm not dead.

 

I have a shoot Monday and will carry boths Ms plus a video camera plus a digital audio recorder - when the trip involves 2 days of driving plus a helicopter trip to and from the back of beyond, "Ooops, sorry - my camera failed" doesn't pay the bills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And believe me I do envy those who carry one small HQ camera with a 20 to 500mm f2 zoom, with the certainty that nothing will ever go wrong... What a load would it it be off my back (to paraphrase another cliche') AND my wallet!

 

In many years of picture taking I have never had a camera let me down, mainly Nikon, in fact my recent purchase of a second M6 body is the first time I have ever owned 2 camera bodies. I can clearly see the justification of owning more than one body if one is making a living out of photography but as an amateur I have never felt the need to own a second body in fact I am seriously considering off loading the second one which I have bought. For what it's worth I only ever take 1 lens out with me and if I happen to have taken the wrong one then big deal

Link to post
Share on other sites

In many years of picture taking I have never had a camera let me down, mainly Nikon, in fact my recent purchase of a second M6 body is the first time I have ever owned 2 camera bodies. I can clearly see the justification of owning more than one body if one is making a living out of photography but as an amateur I have never felt the need to own a second body in fact I am seriously considering off loading the second one which I have bought. For what it's worth I only ever take 1 lens out with me and if I happen to have taken the wrong one then big deal

 

My point exactly...if you need it or think you need it, get one, or two, or... if you don't, don't.

Freedom is a good thing innit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...