camera backup for wedding

[mariacalton]

<p> <br>

I'm doing a wedding for a friend in 2 weeks and Im currently using a nikon D90, what would you suggest as camera backup with similar menus (apart from the same one) that wont break the bank but will use the same lenses?<br /> It would actually cost me more upfront to rent due to the huge deposit which I cant afford.<br>

The lenses I have are:<br /> nikon 50mm 1.8<br /> nikon 85mm 1.8<br /> nikon 18-105mm 3.5<br /> tamron 17-50mm 2.8<br>

thanks guys</p>

 

[2yellowdogs]

<p>The ideal situation is for your backup to be the same as your primary. That way, you're not fumbling around if/when you use the second body. If you can afford it, that's the way to go.</p>

[rt_jones]

<p>I don't understand. If you can afford to buy one outright then you can afford a deposit (which you'll get back).</p>

<p>Dan's advice is sound but when I shot with one body and rented the 2nd one, I always rented something I was considering buying or upgrading to down the road. Kind of killing 2 birds with one stone. </p>

[craig_big]

I would be surprised if the friend couldn't come up with a budget for you to perform photography services. You might explain that you need a deposit up front to cover rental deposits. I wouldn't recommend anything south of the D90. Realize that the D90 is really Nikon's lowest option for quality work. Either rent another D90, or something fancier like a D300s. When renting, most people are apt to get the best money can buy, since it's just for one day (or weekend).

 

But to get to your question, you might look for a D200 as a backup. That's probably the best cheaper option. Next step down would be the D80. Seriously, though, I don't think anyone would think this is a really great idea. You could get a D5000 or (yeesh) a D3000, you'd really be scraping the bottom of the barrel. The D5000 might produce results as good as the D90 in most circumstances, but the menus will be different, and it doesn't have a front control wheel. The D5000 and D3000 also don't have a focus screw, so you couldn't use your 50mm or 85mm. (Those last two points also apply to the older D40 and D60).

[StuartMoxham]

<p>If you can't rent and you want something cheaper than a D90 you would be looking at used D200/D80, used D70 or a used D50 they are older bodies and don't perform as well as the D90 at higher ISOs, thats not to say that you could not produce decent wedding photos with those bodies though. The D40, D60, D3000 and D5000 won't allow you to use you prime lenses. The D1h and D1x will likely need new batteries as old batteries often won't hold a charge and the D2x used is likely more expensive than a D90.</p>

[chauncey_huffman]

<p>I shoot with a D90 as my primary and I have a D70 as my backup. I'm not comfortable with the D70 as my backup so I am saving with the intent of buying another D90. Even though I would LOVE to be able to go FX and get a D700, they are more than 2x the price of a D90 and I figure that when the successor to the D700 comes out I might just sell one of my D90's to get funds towards the D700s/x. So, in theory I'm in the same situation as you, the difference is that I already have a back up, but it's not very good and I know what I want to upgrade it to, the same thing that I already shoot as my primary.</p>

[gregory_c]

<p>Back up with same body & similar flash. Lenses, you are fine. I remember shooting a wedding with 1 fixed lens. I would say back up with film if necessary, but gee, what is film ????</p>