Do you guys get duplicated equip?

[RaymondC]

<p>Knowing there are all sorts. What sort of items do you guys get? </p>

<p>My lot at the local camera falls into 2 camps. They just pick up 2 or 3 lenses 2.8 zooms and that's it. The other might just pick up a kit zoom and a tele zoom both pretty compactful. A smaller bunch, may get some fast primes b/c they may be more into abstract walk and about photography like pictures of lamp post and signs for eg. </p>

<p>I have been thinking lately that there are so much stuff to choose and it might not be cost effective and some people could just deal with fewer items. For myself, I just take scenic so I just use slow aperture lenses but there is an urge that if I get pushed to take pictures of people slow lenses might not look as nice. My digital outfit consist of Sigma 10-20, Nikon 18-70 (kit) and a 80-200 which is a f/4.5-5.6 I generally forgo one of the the latter two for travel and occasionally I might bring a 35/1.8 DX for a low light grab shot. </p>

<p>R.</p>

 

[SCL]

<p>It sounds like you're beginning to get a GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) attack. Lock up the wallet and credit cards. I hate to think of all the duplicate gear I acquired over many years....and now I'm finally disposing of it...piece by painful piece.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>I'm not certain I understand your question, but it appears to me that you're asking whether we have exactly duplicated equipment or whether we have somewhat redundant, but not exactly duplicated equipment. I think photographers fall into two camps. Some photographers might have a couple of 5DII bodies, for instance, but to me that wastes an opportunity. Rather than two items that are exactly the same, I choose to have two items that are slightly different and have different strengths and weaknesses, but which can be used in lieu of the other, should there be an equipment malfunction. So for bodies, I have a full frame (5D -- soon to upgrade to a 5DII) and a crop frame (40D). This combination of formats augments the possible uses of my entire collection of lenses.</p>

<p>I have two series of lenses that can back up for each other. One series is my "top shelf" series -- mostly Canon L optics. The other series consists of much less expensive consumer lenses. I might choose consumer lenses for situations where I want to be less conspicuous or "risk" cheaper gear. Then I have a few other lenses that are somewhat special purpose, for which I have no backup. My fisheye lens is a great example. I can't imagine needing a backup fisheye.</p>

<p>The redundancy in my collection is probably overkill, because I don't shoot venues such as weddings. If anything ever goes down (which it never has), I can reschedule/re-shoot. However, I'm prepared with backups if Murphy's Law ever does rear its ugly head at an inopportune time.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>I am def not getting new stuff, lol. I will just work around it or shoot something different.<br>

I was interested to know what pple (you guys) did. I (we) are in the camp of hobbyists. We just get a few items and be done with it. But some pple I know do get into all sorts and the saying that "if you have invested glass maybe not good to switch brands", have never really been a factor for us. </p>

[flatulent1]

<p>Redundancy is my middle name, apparently.</p>

<p>I have basically the same kit (24, 50, 135, 28-85, 80-200) in Canon FD, Contax, Minolta, and Mamiya 645 (minus the zooms). The kit that differs is my EOS kit, which is mostly f/2.8 or f/4 zooms. The Minolta is expendable; I just can't bring myself to do it.</p>

[nathangardner]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not certain I understand your question</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There was a question?</p>

<p>Anyways, to chime in on what this may be about, I'll share how I determine what to get. I am fortunate enough to have access to much more gear than I can afford, but before I had this access here was my kit (and I still use this gear frequently):</p>

<p>All Canon <br>

1D II<br>

17-40mm<br>

50mm f/1.8<br>

400mm f/5.6</p>

<p>I didn't have a huge budget so I tried to get the best lenses for my money. I like to shoot landscapes when they present themselves, so the 17-40mm seemed like an affordable way to get good wide glass. I love to shoot wildlife and birds so the 400mm was the longest, cheapest, and best glass for the budget. I had a 70-200mm before this, but always used it at 200mm and wished it was longer. The 50mm is a no brainer at <$100 and gets used a ton for various purposes. The 1D II gave me a little bit larger sensor than APS-C to take better advantage of the wide lens and has superior AF for wildlife. Not sure if you wanted to hear all that, but that was my line of thinking for my gear. I figured out what I wanted to do and then bought the best tools that I could afford. </p>

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>The only real duplicate is in the standard zoom range, 24-105 and 28-135. Others are primes whereas the same focal length is also available in a zoom lens but n general the primes offer advantages like faster or macro. In general most lenses are used more or less frequently - except for the 28-135 zoom.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

I've got G.A.S. bad. I've sold off a lot but I still have a bunch of stuff which is actually useful again after buying a NEX and

a bunch of adapters! Some were working cameras that I used regularly like the Minolta XE-5 and lenses, or the Minolta

600si (2) and lenses, or the Leica M2s (2) and lenses, or the Contax RTS III and lenses, or the Canon 5D and small

number of lenses. Others were just interesting like the Contax IIAs (2) and lenses.

 

 

I sold a bunch like a Contarex system and some Retinas and a Voigtlander Prominent. It just became too overwhelming. I

started worrying about "exercising" them all to make sure they all still worked. Lot of fun though. I usually bought stuff I

could get a good deal on, but that wasn't always the case (RTS III, first M2, Canon 5D). I definitely have it bad. Maybe I

need to find a phographer psychologist.

[john_bellenis]

<p>As a commercial location photographer I am usually away - frequently in places where there is no handy photography store or rental company - so redundancy is the name of the game.</p>

<p>I try to make to sure to have as much overlap as possible without totally duplicating items if it's avoidable. I travel with both heavy and light tripods, spare light heads, cables and lots of spare bulbs and batteries, etc. I make sure to have extras of anything I would be uncomfortable not to have, like cable releases, levels, card readers, caps, pocket wizards and small items.</p>

<p>When it comes to cameras and lenses, I have four bodies (all full frame, as I have no need for additional reach) and while some focal lengths are exact duplicates I do have different versions (ie. 70-200 f2.8 IS and 70-200 f4 - non IS) as they have different strengths and still cover for each other should one get lost or damaged. </p>

<p>When something does get dropped, misplaced or craps out on me it's a lifesaver to have the redundancy, but most of the time I'm just hauling extra stuff around for insurance and to be prepared for any eventuality. As is so often the case, it seem that simply having a spare ensures that the original item will never break down! On the plus side, I am contributing to the economy every week with excess baggage charges so I have that going for me!</p>

[denniswms]

<p>I have three identical bodies (one is the backup) and most of the available lenses with duplicate 90 and 135 so that I can run identical rigs simultaneously with color trans in one and B&W neg in the other. I haven't bought anything in years.</p>