Why two bodies?

[raymond_tai]

The same reason I carry an extra back for MF - one for 100 and the other for

400 film.

[ilkka]

When I mostly used 35 mm SLRs I did use two identical bodies. Loaded with different films and different lenses, with one acting as a backup in case the other called it quits. But now I have gone on a completely different course. I often carry two bodies, but they are totally different. One medium format or large format and one Leica M or Xpan, for example. It is important to have another camera for backup and if you have a large selection of lenses, it would make sense that your backup body can make use of all those lenses. But I like the versatility and variation of different formats, and I only have a few lenses.

[ray_moth]

Same as Marc, for the different magnifications. I use the Tri-Elmar on a .58 M6TTL, because it enables me to see the 28mm frameline. I alternate between 50mm Summilux, 90mm Elmarit and 135 Elmar on a .72, which helps me to frame and focus better with those lenses. Usually, the same type of film is in both cameras.

[pete_su]

I take two bodies on trips in case one breaks.

 

I never carry two at the same time anymore. Too heavy and too confusing.

 

I might do it if I wanted to shoot really fast and never change lenses.

 

I find I can't shoot diffrent films at the same time.

[monsoonphoto.net]

Sell the Canon SLR. That's what I did when I bought my M6. Simply too bulky to have an SLR around you when you travel. Haven't regretted it at all.

[bob soltis]

As a backup, especially on the trip of a lifetime.

 

As for Haji's comment it, See the photo of Jim Marshall with five M

bodies at:

 

http://www.marshallphoto.com/mp.v1/content/Technical.htm

[cd thacker]

When Sabastiao Salgado shot the Reagan assasination attempt, he had three Leica Ms around his neck. And in just a few seconds shot most of three rolls. (Not that you'll be encountering assasination attempts - though one never knows . . . .)<P>

 

My ideal kit is three Leica Ms and two SLRs (R6.2 or Nikon F3HP; or, possibly, something similar in Contax). That translates to two Ms and one SLR for actual use, and one of each for backup (because, again, you never know). <P>

 

I figure two rangefinders, each with a different magnification (.58 and .85 or, in the case of an M3, .91 isn't it?), would be the ideal combo for a classic paring of focal lengths - 24mm and 50mm, say, or 35mm and 75mm; or some combo thereof. Not to mention simultaneous use of color and b&w, which you might be game to experiment with (rather like patting your head and rubbing your stomach at the same time). <P>

 

Meanwhile, if you're going to do any tele work, ever, or any macro, you'll need that SLR: I'd hang onto it. And buy the second M.

[john_amiet3]

Hyatt,

Collectively ALL the answers here are right.....each for the individual that made them! So, your answer must be, "do what suits you", NOBODY else can tell you.

I could, but that would probably not be right for you. Get it!

It wasn't meant to be easy, and it ain't.

P.S. I would buy the extra body (Shhh... don't tell anyone I said it!)

[michael_kastner]

Spending more and more money on more Leica stuff would, sooner or later, help my wife to get us divorced. Another body (yes, as a Leica M body -- no, that's not the joke yet) would probably do the trick.

[gary voth]

For travel with the family, I only use one body. Shooting professionally, however, I always use two cameras, and sometimes more.

 

Two bodies allow use of both wide and long lenses. I use a M6TTL .58 for lenses 35mm and shorter, and an M3 with the 50 Noctlilux and the 90 AA.