«

Alan Browne <> writes:

> On 2012-02-16 19:48 , Savageduck wrote:
>> I was noodling about on line and came across this regarding Nikon repairs.
>> < http://ifixit.org/1349/how-nikon-is-...camera-repair/ >
>
> Regarding the web page above, there were a few ridiculous points, the
> worse being:
>
> QUOTE
> If you depend on your camera for work, as Jarvie does, having to mail
> your camera in to be fixed will cost you more than just the price of
> the repair: lost business, shipping costs, and time lost waiting for
> the Postal Service to shuttle the camera back and forth.
> UNQUOTE
>
> Really? Does the writer REALLY believe Jarvie has a single camera?

But absolutely having to have two cameras (or three if you believe you
need two working ones to take to a gig) is itself a cost, and a rather
large one.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:53:54 -0500, Alan Browne
<> wrote:
: On 2012-02-17 18:06 , David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
:
: > But absolutely having to have two cameras (or three if you believe you
: > need two working ones to take to a gig) is itself a cost, and a rather
: > large one.
:
: I don't know of any pro photog who brings less than 2 cameras to a gig,
: event, shoot, wedding, etc. His fees depend on taking photos at the
: time needed, not making excuses about failed eqt. Another commercial
: photographer nearby always has 3 cameras (sports, medical, etc.).
: Another brings 2 identical rigs (everything from cameras to lenses to
: lighting) to every wedding.
:
: The capital is depreciated at 20% per year making it a sliver of annual
: revenue. A couple news photogs I know always have 3 cameras, each with
: the 1 of the holy trinity lenes mounted. Saves time switching. Those
: cameras are owned by the paper, however. (Who still lay it off at
: 20%/year).

I usually carry two to an event or, say, a building construction tour, where
it would be hard to stop and change lenses. But I draw the line there. I can't
really imagine how I'd juggle three.

I actually think that this may have come up in one of the newsgroups some
years back and that one of the participants lectured me on how it's possible
to carry more than two. But I'm afraid I remain unconvinced. Maybe if I were
thirty years younger, ... :^)

Bob

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:02:22 -0500, Alan Browne
<> wrote:

>I've never carried more than 2 and even that's a PITA. Was really a
>PITA on film as the "story line" would be broken across different rolls
>of film. Even with digital the sequencing is not linear v. the events.

Quite easy to sort/rename etc files via date/timestamp. I don't see
how this is a real issue. And yes I do use multiple cameras.

"Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:53:54 -0500, Alan Browne
> <> wrote:
> : On 2012-02-17 18:06 , David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> :
> : > But absolutely having to have two cameras (or three if you believe you
> : > need two working ones to take to a gig) is itself a cost, and a rather
> : > large one.
> :
> : I don't know of any pro photog who brings less than 2 cameras to a gig,
> : event, shoot, wedding, etc. His fees depend on taking photos at the
> : time needed, not making excuses about failed eqt. Another commercial
> : photographer nearby always has 3 cameras (sports, medical, etc.).
> : Another brings 2 identical rigs (everything from cameras to lenses to
> : lighting) to every wedding.
> :
> : The capital is depreciated at 20% per year making it a sliver of annual
> : revenue. A couple news photogs I know always have 3 cameras, each with
> : the 1 of the holy trinity lenes mounted. Saves time switching. Those
> : cameras are owned by the paper, however. (Who still lay it off at
> : 20%/year).
>
> I usually carry two to an event or, say, a building construction tour,
> where
> it would be hard to stop and change lenses. But I draw the line there. I
> can't
> really imagine how I'd juggle three.
>
> I actually think that this may have come up in one of the newsgroups some
> years back and that one of the participants lectured me on how it's
> possible
> to carry more than two. But I'm afraid I remain unconvinced. Maybe if I
> were
> thirty years younger, ... :^)
>
> Bob

Since my camera is a working tool, I find it a requirement to have and carry
spares. I shoot the Canon FX (1964-69) 35mm SLR. I have 475 camera bodies
and over 600 various lenses for them. I think I'm covered for spares!
Ken

On 2012-02-18 17:00:22 +0000, K W Hart said:

> "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:53:54 -0500, Alan Browne
>> <> wrote:
>> : On 2012-02-17 18:06 , David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>> :
>> : > But absolutely having to have two cameras (or three if you believe you
>> : > need two working ones to take to a gig) is itself a cost, and a rather
>> : > large one.
>> :
>> : I don't know of any pro photog who brings less than 2 cameras to a gig,
>> : event, shoot, wedding, etc. His fees depend on taking photos at the
>> : time needed, not making excuses about failed eqt. Another commercial
>> : photographer nearby always has 3 cameras (sports, medical, etc.).
>> : Another brings 2 identical rigs (everything from cameras to lenses to
>> : lighting) to every wedding.
>> :
>> : The capital is depreciated at 20% per year making it a sliver of annual
>> : revenue. A couple news photogs I know always have 3 cameras, each with
>> : the 1 of the holy trinity lenes mounted. Saves time switching. Those
>> : cameras are owned by the paper, however. (Who still lay it off at
>> : 20%/year).
>>
>> I usually carry two to an event or, say, a building construction tour,
>> where
>> it would be hard to stop and change lenses. But I draw the line there. I
>> can't
>> really imagine how I'd juggle three.
>>
>> I actually think that this may have come up in one of the newsgroups some
>> years back and that one of the participants lectured me on how it's
>> possible
>> to carry more than two. But I'm afraid I remain unconvinced. Maybe if I
>> were
>> thirty years younger, ... :^)
>>
>> Bob
>
> Since my camera is a working tool, I find it a requirement to have and carry
> spares. I shoot the Canon FX (1964-69) 35mm SLR. I have 475 camera bodies
> and over 600 various lenses for them. I think I'm covered for spares!

I guess you won't be switching to Nikon in the near future.

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:02:22 -0500, Alan Browne
<> wrote:
: I've never carried more than 2 [cameras] and even that's a PITA.
: Was really a PITA on film as the "story line" would be broken
: across different rolls of film. Even with digital the sequencing
: is not linear v. the events.

The current version of Canon's "EOS Utility" lets you synchronize a camera's
time with that of your computer. So before a shoot you can set all the cameras
you might use to the exact same time. Then when you sort all the pictures by
shooting time and then rename, the sequencing will be correct. Don't know
whether all the manufacturers' SW allows that, but they usually follow each
other pretty closely in such matters.

Bob

Alan Browne <> writes:

> On 2012-02-18 10:46 , me wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 10:02:22 -0500, Alan Browne
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>> I've never carried more than 2 and even that's a PITA. Was really a
>>> PITA on film as the "story line" would be broken across different rolls
>>> of film. Even with digital the sequencing is not linear v. the events.
>>
>> Quite easy to sort/rename etc files via date/timestamp. I don't see
>> how this is a real issue. And yes I do use multiple cameras.
>
> Where did I say that couldn't be done?
>
> What can't be done (conveniently) is frame numbering per the order of
> the events. (In Bridge IAC).

Yes, that's a problem with all the automatic import systems. That's why
I never use any of them (that and I'm afraid of them; too many people
report losing files that way, I've never lost a file once it got onto
the card okay).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

Alan Browne wrote:
> Snip
>
> I've never carried more than 2 and even that's a PITA.
>

It's been my habit, when shooting difficult areas such as in Ghost
Towns, abandoned buildings, or harbor scenes, etc... I generally carry
two Nikon cameras. To limit my equipment, a 17-35 f2.8 lens goes on the
D700 and a 24-120 f4 lens goes on the D300. A belly-pack is used to
carry favored 77mm filters and a flash with an accessory extension cable.

Yes, it has been a PITA at times, in fact more times than not because
they are heavy, but when culling my shots the inconvenience once felt
seems to fade way. If I were a lot younger, I probably would carry my bag.

On 2/23/2012 7:19 PM, nick c wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>> Snip
>>
>> I've never carried more than 2 and even that's a PITA.
>
> It's been my habit, when shooting difficult areas such as in Ghost
> Towns, abandoned buildings, or harbor scenes, etc... I generally carry
> two Nikon cameras. To limit my equipment, a 17-35 f2.8 lens goes on the
> D700 and a 24-120 f4 lens goes on the D300. A belly-pack is used to
> carry favored 77mm filters and a flash with an accessory extension cable.
>
> Yes, it has been a PITA at times, in fact more times than not because
> they are heavy, but when culling my shots the inconvenience once felt
> seems to fade way. If I were a lot younger, I probably would carry my bag.
>
>
>
I know the feeling. I carry two Nikons using a Black Rapid R strap. It's
seems easier to carry two with that strap, than just one.

--
Peter

PeterN wrote:
> On 2/23/2012 7:19 PM, nick c wrote:
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>> Snip
>>>
>>> I've never carried more than 2 and even that's a PITA.
>>
>> It's been my habit, when shooting difficult areas such as in Ghost
>> Towns, abandoned buildings, or harbor scenes, etc... I generally carry
>> two Nikon cameras. To limit my equipment, a 17-35 f2.8 lens goes on the
>> D700 and a 24-120 f4 lens goes on the D300. A belly-pack is used to
>> carry favored 77mm filters and a flash with an accessory extension cable.
>>
>> Yes, it has been a PITA at times, in fact more times than not because
>> they are heavy, but when culling my shots the inconvenience once felt
>> seems to fade way. If I were a lot younger, I probably would carry my
>> bag.
>>
>>
>>
> I know the feeling. I carry two Nikons using a Black Rapid R strap. It's
> seems easier to carry two with that strap, than just one.
>

I didn't know (by brand name) what a Black Rapid R strap looked like so
I look it up and found the following. Look at the last picture of the
girl with two cameras. Does that rig look like the rig you use? My
cameras have battery packs and quick release plates attached to the
bottom of the battery packs. I've never run out of power and I often use
one of two lightweight tripods. I've found readily affixed quick release
plates to be a speedy tripod setup advantage.

It looks like the illustration shows the cameras are being carried
upside down. I guess I have to see one of those rigs to see if I would
be comfortable using such a strap and still keep my camera setups.

Thanks for telling me what you use.

http://www.ppmag.com/web-exclusives/...d-r-strap.html

What I have been using are two cameras slung around the neck and
shoulder (like bandoleers) with each camera draped at my sides. I tie a
separate chord around the midriff keeping each camera in place at each
side until they are being used. It may not look good but it seems to
work fairly well. If I were to complain about anything it would surely
be weight.

Again, thanks for the insight.