Is your backup camera for paid work as good as your primary?

[steve_johnston9]

<p>

<p >Is your backup camera for paid work as good as your primary? I do some secondary shooting at weddings, events. When I go solo, I will obviously need to buy a backup. I currently use a Canon 50D but am looking at buying a Canon 30D as backup? </p>

</p>

[nuzumphoto]

<p>Ours are not, simply because as we buy new cameras the old cameras go into the "back-up" status. We don't completely re-outfit when a new camera comes out.</p>

[william-porter]

<p>Steve J.,</p>

<p>Like Steve N., I buy a new camera now and then. I use the best of the older cameras as my second camera. I generally shoot with two cameras so the second camera isn't just a backup, it's an actively working camera for me. If the first camera develops a problem, I can simply grab the second and keep shooting.</p>

<p>My current two cameras are a Pentax K10D (10 MP) and a Pentax K20D (14.6 MP). Although one is higher res than the other and there are other differences, the ergonomics are nearly identical and I think that is important. I don't have to remember how to do things differently on one camera vs the other.</p>

<p>I don't think your backup or second camera has to be identical to your first. I think it just has to be <em>good enough</em> to shoot the event. An ordinary point and shoot would I guess be marginally better than nothing. Say your main camera was a Nikon D3 and that was basically all you had besides your Coolpix point and shoot. If the D3 died on you, I guess you could take some kind of pictures with the Coolpix. But I think you'd have a disappointed bride after the wedding. In my case, if my 14.6 MP camera died, I could continue shooting with the 10 MP camera and nobody would notice. Bride might not be able to order the very largest print sizes quite as easily but otherwise everything would be fine.</p>

<p>Will</p>

[neilambrose]

<p>Yes. I work with identical cameras. Usually shooting with two and a third as redundancy.</p>

<p>For me the point of a back-up is that it will work the same way and produce the same quality images as the unit that failed. In case of emergency I like to know I'll be able to carry on working as if nothing had gone wrong.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>For me the answer is 'yes'. </p>

<p>I shoot with a D300 and have a D300 as backup. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[booray]

<p>I use two identical cameras as well and shoot with both. I'll admit I'm torn about what to do when I decide to upgrade. I dearly love having two identical cameras but it's a lot of money to upgrade them both at the same time, especially when I only shoot about 5% of my images with the second camera. <br>

For me the big question is ISO performance. If you are shooting at 6400 with a 5dmkII and it breaks and your backup is a 40D at 1600 you will not be able to shoot the same style of pictures.</p>

[michaelchadwickphotography]

<p>Once the money makes it possible, I will make my secondary camera body the same as my primary (Canon 5D Mark II), and make the current secondary (Canon 50D) an emergency-only tertiary backup. I agree with Neil that having the same quality of image from your secondary is ideal.</p>

[silverdae]

<p>I chose, when I went solo, to buy a second body identical to my first (and another lens) instead of upgrading. I got an "used" (overstock) body for next to nothing from Adorama. I think people forget sometimes what a few-year-old camera can do. Take David Ziser- he still uses 30"x40" prints made with a Fuji S1 as displays. Upgraded equipment is great, and I would always recommend shooting with the best, but if you know what your older camera will do, and how it handles situations differently than your newest-upgrade, there is no reason to think you have to have the best, top of the line, to get great prints. For instance, I know what my older body will do and I know its limitations. I have a slower snyc speed than most (which is my primary complaint), but I know how to make it work for me. I know that my resolution is lower, so I know that I have to shoot as close to what my final crop will be to maximize the usable data. I know that I can't push my exposures much at all, even in RAW, and that I have to NAIL the exposure (to the tenth of a stop) at anything over 400 iso or it absolutely isn't usable. Would my life be easier if I had the D700 (drool...)? Yes, but I am completely satisfied with my work using an older model camera, and I would put it up against anyone using a brand spanking new whatever model. </p>

<p>Maximize the use of whatever you have. You have to be willing to learn the limitations and work-arounds, but in my situation, the money saved can be better used on other pieces of equipment and I'm only sacrificing ease of use, not quality. A larger file size doesn't always mean a better image. Execution still rules when it comes to quality. </p>

[william-porter]

<blockquote>

<p>Maximize the use of whatever you have. ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Words to live by, Jen!</p>

<p><br /></p>

[senor_crocodrillo]

<p>For me, using two identical bodies is about not having to switch gears. When I shot film, I had a 1V and 1N. They make the same quality photos, but the focusing was pretty different. It bugged me enough that I would sometimes lose concentration. I can see how the problem might be made worse if the bodies' other controls were in different places.<br />You don't need to buy a backup. Just rent one until it makes sense to buy one. And I think it makes sense right now to buy, if you can, as the latest generation of digital cameras is very, very good. And I don't see sensors getting so drastically better that you'll need to replace them right away. The only reason I can see for replacing my 5dm2s is reliability and/or wear & tear. Or maybe a significantly better focusing system to replace the crappy one they put in that camera. Or maybe a significantly lighter body.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>It is up to you and whether not having an identical body will impact your ability to deliver the same quality product you promised your client. I personally don't have identical bodies, but I would have no problem delivering a product to my client that was made using my second/back up body. Difference in controls does not bother me.</p>

[juanita_ramirez]

<p>30d as a backup for a 50d should be fine. They're both crop bodies from the same product line. There's even less difference between those two cameras than there even is between a 5D and an xxD. The point is to have a backup that's capable of delivering quality images in case your primary fails. The 30d easily fits the bill for a 50d shooter.</p>

[savagesax]

For myself and my photo partner Craig, we use the same cameras. My spare is pretty much in new condition! Guess I should start using it!

 

The reason I prefer using the same cameras is all of the settings, buttons things like that are the same.

[dave_wilson1]

<p>I would think it's whatever you're comfortable with as long as you can produce good results. Digital is so different than film, I'm just about to get another body, maybe a D90 or newer 3000/5000 whatever it is to compliment my pair of D200s. I don't really want a 700 or 300s because I think they're going to release the next thing sooner than later and then it's already yesterday's stuff at a big price. So, basically I just go with the flow.</p>

[silverdae]

<p>Another note- check Adorama's used department. Like I said, I got a second body from them and it is, what I believe, an overstock item. It is a discontinued camera, and the one I bought shows NO signs of wear. It is shiny-new, in better shape than my original. You could pick up a similar (but discontinued) body to what you have and save a ton, still having a good back-up.</p>

[caleb_santos]

<blockquote>

<p>Is your backup camera for paid work as good as your primary?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Me and my partner work as a team. We use a combination of 5Dmk2, 5D, 7D, 10D, EOS3. My backup gear isn't as new or as capable as my primary. But, I would use my 10D as primary no sweat. To answer your question, I think the 5D is nearly as good as the 5Dmk2 for 98% of shooting. So, I think I will be alright. But, for you I would suggest a 40D if you can stretch your budget a little bit. </p>

[dejansmaic]

<p>I have three cameras: D200, D300 and D700. I use whatever camera best fits the shooting I am doing: D300 for sports & landscape in lighting not requiring a ISO >800, D700 for sports, landscape & others not requiring LOTS of cropping and needed in low lighting conditions >1600 ISO, and D200 for good lighting and fun camera. Each camera backs up each other during different applications.</p>

[jc5066]

<p>No, but my back-up gear is good enough to do the job.<br>

<br />When I upgrade equipment, my old primary equipment becomes my back-up.</p>

<p>You can't buy cheap-o equipment just to say have you back-up gear. Any and all gear you have should be able to do the job at hand with a quality end product.</p>

[charles_badua]

<p>My backup camera is a D300 (my 2nd camera on me / quick 2nd option) and a d700 (wife uses it / would be my first option incase my camera goes bad), while my primary is a D700. I love this combo because the buttons and controls of the two are basically the same, so there is no confusing things. I also get the best of FX and DX. As much as I want the Nikon D3S, I will hold back for the new D700's successor, because I want to be able to use the same batteries and have the same controls. Once I get that, the D700 will go to back up status, and perhaps the d300 will be sold, or stay as my everyday camera.</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>My primary is a D300s, second of the same, and the D700 is for more specialty portraits and such.</p>

<p>So, yes and no.</p>

[Ian Taylor]

<p>I use a 5DMK2 with 5D as backup. Recently I was going with 3 x 5Ds, but have gone to 2 bodies for the time being.</p>

[felix_mizioznikov]

<p>5d2 and 5d2 for backup</p>