Your experience with 2 bodies?

<p>When I am working I always carry two or more cameras. I can't afford not to get the shot. For personal use I sometimes carry one or just slip a point and shoot into my pocket. <br>

The D3 and D300 are, more or less, state of the art. But if all I had for a backup is my old D100 I would carry that. It still takes wonderful pictures. There are few, if any, photographers here or anywhere else that could not save an assignment with it. Given that one has appropriate lenses for it and the expertise to adapt it would be unlikely that anyone could tell the difference under any but the most extreme circumstances. <br>

I have a friend and fellow professional photographer who is still shooting weddings with a D2H and D70. Most would say that one is obsolete and one unsuitable to the task. His pictures are magnificent and he commands top dollar. <br>

Some of the hardest working professional photographers I know are PRCA rodeo photographers. Last weekend I worked a rodeo with two of them. One carried a Canon 50D and the other a Nikon D200. Their work was exemplary and they shot literally thousands of pictures over the 9 days. They thought my gear was excessive. (D2Hs and D300). I thought thier photographs were wonderful. I was too ashamed to bring the D3. They would have taken away my boots and hat.</p>

 

<p>When you get older even one body gets heavy. I used to carry a Leica and a Hasselblad SWC everywhere I went. Now nothing, sometimes a Leica.</p>

<p>Am I the only one who insists almost always in carrying two bodies?<br>

It is seldom anyone sees me without two bodies with two totally different lenses attached.<br>

That's one reason I can be such a prolific shooter. <br>

I never use a lens cap; while you're removing your lens cap or changing your lens or even removing it from that camera bag, the subject went away, the lighting changed, or there was a slight movement that ruined the capture I saw. I got it, but you won't.<br>

I took the photo in 1 to 3 seconds (sometimes), and while you with your one camera might have got it, if you were lucky enough to have preset that camera and have preset your lens (and have the proper lens on the camera -- preferably a zoom with a very large aperture.) But there's a very big chance you missed it. I didn't.<br>

I always (or almost always) walk, ride or move with two late model digital cameras, usually the D300s, with such lenses as the 17~55 f 2.8 and the 70~200 f 2.8. <br>

Heavy?<br>

You bet my sore aching neck.<br>

But I have a payoff in captures that is equalled by few, for those unexpected moments; while other photographers are trying to get in close with their Leicas, I already have shot a whole series with my 70~200 f 2.8, and nobody even knew I SAW the circumstance.<br>

But if I'm close I still can shoot the 17~55 f 2.8, and if that sounds like it is a lot of weight, it certainly is, and literally back and neck-breaking, but the reward in good captures is the payoff.<br>

And, get this.<br>

If it sounds like all that equipment is a put-off to prospective subjects, it occasionally is, but more often it is not -- many see it as a sign of professionalism (I'm not), and are flattered that they are the subject of someone whom they believe has equipment that betrays professional skills and training (before I ever speak to them, they have formed this conclusion based on my equipment, and sometimes when we do talk, I joke that 'I could just be a rich doctor, who went on a shopping trip to the camera store and a complete fake . . . . and my photos could be all complete crap.<br>

I did meet one doctor who had beautiful equipment, and lots of it, who took the worst photos ever. But his equipment sparkled and he LOOKED like a pro (except his equipment sparkled).<br>

Cartier-Bresson was described to his biographer Assouline, as once going into some remote part of Asia and being seen with FOUR Leicas. And, contrary to popular belief, any person examining his captures can easily determine that he just didn't use a 50 mm lens. That's poppycock, of the sort he liked to promote as he had a somewhat impish (and mercurial) sense of humor.<br>

He used wide to moderate tele on his Leicas, and sometimes he also cropped -- just look at the aspect ratio of some of his photos: they're not all 2:3 as they would be if they were all pure uncropped photos.<br>

He shot lots of his landscapes with a moderate tele; a look will reveal that, if you're an experienced shooter and know how subjects look -- legends and myths aside.<br>

(Cartier-Bresson was full of all sorts of foolishness, even about his status as a legend . . . and took a sort of peevish delight in being an enigma . . . and not correcting the record . . . )<br>

That aside, the rule of Elliott Erwitt was 'madame, f8 and be there'. And my equipment allows me to 'be there' whether I'm stopped in traffic at a light, in a bus, or bus stop on a long distance bus ride in Ukraine or Russia, or in some remote country anywhere. <br>

If a wide angle shot is not appropriate or unavailable or too fleeting for me to get to in time, I'll shoot tele. If I'm in the midst of things, I'll eschew the tele and shoot wide to moderate.<br>

It all depends and I might switch off from one to the other, alternately.<br>

The problem with all this is arising from chairs with two cameras and heavy lenses around the neck, or traveling on planes (if they fall from an overhead bin, well, that's that, when someone pulls out an overcoat and pulls your cameras out too and they fall to the floor of the aircraft or bean someone, so the floor's the aircraft floor's the thing or the vacant seat next to you, if possible, or better, the vacant airplane floor next to you.<br>

The car seat next to me is reserved for my cameras, and if there's an occupant, they have my cameras in their lap, and automatic roll-down auto door windows are a must.<br>

Zooms are a must, and of course, they're heavier, as they require more glass, just as does wider aperture glass. It all translates in to more backbreaking weight, and I'm already disabled and it hurts horribly sometimes, but the payoff is in the photos, and in the sheer numbers of photos that are not attainable with only one camera.<br>

The other drawback beside the physical debility of carrying so much weight, is the problem of moving about rapicly (or at all) with two big, heavy lenses/bodies and the inevitable problem that they're going to hit each other.<br>

I really am not a heavy shooter by pro standards. I mght put 10,000 and a max of 15,000 or maybe even 20,000 frames on a camera shutter before moving on -- all in one body's lifetime with me. That's not heavy mechanical use at all.<br>

But my cameras look like they've had 200,000 frames, though they're practically new inside; same for my lenses, with perfect glass but dented/bruised/abraided barrels. Nikon keeps everything working perfectly (I saw them two days ago for a quick fix, and they're wonderful to me in El Segundo. (I think most of the repair staff snuck a chance to come out to the counter to look at my draft book, too, which surprised and gladdened me).<br>

If you're going to shoot two cameras, be forewarned, it's a thing that requires dedication, but the payoff is in wonderful opportunities fulfilled. Almost no shot will go uncaptured if you have a good eye and quick reflex, as well as the ability to preset cameras (iso, focus points, etc., as you move about, in and out of light and shadow, in and out of buildings, and as you spy potential subjects.<br>

It's an art, but not entirely difficullt to master.<br>

A person has to be part mule, I'm afraid, and be totally dedicated to the capture to carry such equipment (often in the dead of night in far-off countries where streets might not seem so safe).<br>

I have three places i will never go with such equipment 1. Mexico near the bordrer (and now most anyplace; 2. Brazil in its entirety, because i value my life -- and encountered once a resident of the 'City of God'; and 3. Oakland's south parts while walking. <br>

[i haven't been to Africa and surely mght demand a Leica or two rather than risk my life over an easily spotted large digital Nikon, in certain countries there.)<br>

So, I'm a two-camera shooter, and sometimes more, if i need to use more lenses.<br>

One thing, you can't keep a lookout for your personal safety while changing lenses either; you're very vulnerable at that moment, and it can be a long moment that you're very exposed, thinking of a fleeting subject, wrapped up in equipment and a target for a thief or a personal attack. If you carry two cameras, your head need never go down, and you can always be on the lookout.<br>

While you're changing lense, I've got my capture and am moving on to something else.<br>

I've never lost my lookout for a new capture of my pesonal safety.<br>

That's my view -- even if it's a minority of one.<br>

John (Crosley)<br>

© 2009, John Crosley, all rights reserved</p>

<p>I have D90 and D700, with 80-200 AF-s used primarily on D90 when extra reach is needed and 17-35mm AF-s on D700. Also use 17-35 on D90 as a walk around lens.<br>

Don't normally take both out, will leave one on the car just in case - depends upon what I'm going to shoot.<br>

I do like the flexibility of having the longer reach of the D90 and wider reach of the D700 when circumstances dictate.</p>

<p>When I'm travelling, I always carry two bodies - sometimes three. My D200, my D70s, and if I anticipate shooting any film, my N80. That said, I rarely actually carry more than one into the field, but I need to know I have backups in case of failure (moot point so far - I've never had a Nikon fail on me in the field yet). The backups usually stay in the hotel or the car.</p>

<p>I used to carry a MF 645 and a F4s as a backup. Do to teh nature of teh desert, the F4s got used quite a bit, wow man was that built like a tank. 100% dust proof.</p>

<p>When your at a place on someone elses dime, having to cameras and 2 formats was really handy.</p>

<p>Some body/lens combinations just feel right work great for me such as a D200 with 12-24, D700 with 24-70, and D300 with 200-400. So that's what I usually haul around in my backpack/roller bag.</p>