How many cameras is too many.

TimmyO

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

RaymondLin

At least cameras takes up less space than guitars!

Roland

I’m surprised that no one in a community of guitarists has applied the guitarists’ standard answer to this question. Consider:

”How many guitars do you need, dear?” To which the answer is “Just one more”.

So, if the optimum number of cameras is “Just one more”, the answer to “How many cameras is too many?” becomes “Two more.”

Devil#20

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

I get that and it's right for you but you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not. If you understand properly how a camera sees images and that you can manipulate and alter how you take photographs (something you can't do on your phone) then you won't understand why a camera is better.

With proper understanding of the media and the camera you use then you will consistently outperform a phone even for ideal conditions for a phone (which is all it's designed for when all said and done). Phones are OK for 90% of shots but it's the really great shots that make it onto a wall that you'll never capture. Even then, of that 10%, probably a lot less than that actually do. Even for that 10% you will never better a proper camera. If a phone was just as good they'd never sell a camera costing thousands more. The bottom wouldn't drop out of the older digital cameras market if the new models. didn't provide an improvement. If phones were that great then cameras would now be obsolete; so why aren't they if they're no better than a phone?

Jetsam1

I am the outlier on the outlier as I use Pentax DSLRs.........................

I was going to say something along the lines that on a guitar forum not taking into account the experience and feel of a dedicated camera alongside the case of having a specialised piece of equipment for a specific job.........

I had a lay off since Covid struck and have struggled to get back into many things over the last couple of years due to stress and mental levels of work. The phones are good now but there is a "thing" about a DSLR I like. I do use the phone too and I am not a snob about it.

I have in digital;

Pentax K3ii - Monster. Steep learning curve and unforgiving of my poor technique!! Bought gently used in 2017. APSC sensor.

Pentax K200 - CCD which has a nice look to it bought new in 2008 for gallivanting in Geology world. First "proper" camera actually.

Olympus EM5 - Micro 4/3 only makes sense to me as a system with the compact primes. Small and light and surprisingly effective even though it is now quite old.

Pentax Q - Just a bit mad really. Teeny and tiny with a metal body.

Doing a P/X with MBP Europe at the moment for a bunch of stuff I don't really use and incoming is two lenses for the Pentax DSLR. Still life in it. Pentax have however seemed to have decided to stick with DSLR and aim to work within this niche as this seems to be somewhere that even with lower volumes can remain profitable. Nikon and Canon dropping these to go mirrorless and EVF only is interesting. The newer full frame Pentax K1ii is compact for full frame but very capable. The top level Pentax lenses are superb though, anything autofocus they have ever made is useable on any body and any K mount lens can be used as well with caveats (manual focus needing the green button to meter, but sunny 16 and the dynamic range shooting in RAW can rescue everything unless you totally screw it up).

Also consider the resurgence of film photography and there are still people out there doing large format and medium format film. In the early 2010s I was doing a lot of 35mm and the results even on imperfect scanners are really nice to my eyes. I think it appeals because of the limitations and the fact that it is something that does take more effort and stuff. I think that this cannot just be brushed aside as a "hipster" thing either as I very much was not.

I have been trying manual focus on the K3ii with old film era lenses and have had some decent results. Not easy when I am only using the viewfinder and I hate focus peaking in live view. Awful.

TimmyO

Devil#20 said:

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

I get that and it's right for you but you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not. If you understand properly how a camera sees images and that you can manipulate and alter how you take photographs (something you can't do on your phone) then you won't understand why a camera is better.

With proper understanding of the media and the camera you use then you will consistently outperform a phone even for ideal conditions for a phone (which is all it's designed for when all said and done). Phones are OK for 90% of shots but it's the really great shots that make it onto a wall that you'll never capture. Even then, of that 10%, probably a lot less than that actually do. Even for that 10% you will never better a proper camera. If a phone was just as good they'd never sell a camera costing thousands more. The bottom wouldn't drop out of the older digital cameras market if the new models. didn't provide an improvement. If phones were that great then cameras would now be obsolete; so why aren't they if they're no better than a phone?

All of which is why I opened with 'for my needs'

I wouldn't expect a photographer I'd hired to capture a major life event to use a phone to do it. Or only own one, or one lens. I get that.

robgilmo

Devil#20 said:

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

I get that and it's right for you but you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not. If you understand properly how a camera sees images and that you can manipulate and alter how you take photographs (something you can't do on your phone) then you won't understand why a camera is better.

With proper understanding of the media and the camera you use then you will consistently outperform a phone even for ideal conditions for a phone (which is all it's designed for when all said and done). Phones are OK for 90% of shots but it's the really great shots that make it onto a wall that you'll never capture. Even then, of that 10%, probably a lot less than that actually do. Even for that 10% you will never better a proper camera. If a phone was just as good they'd never sell a camera costing thousands more. The bottom wouldn't drop out of the older digital cameras market if the new models. didn't provide an improvement. If phones were that great then cameras would now be obsolete; so why aren't they if they're no better than a phone?

Photography isnt about 'gear' , sure it helps, photography is art and you can do great art with a pencil and a napkin.

skullfunkerry

For me, two is too many. Weirdly, I've just posted about exactly this on another (photography) forum. When I had my X-T1 & X-T30 I always ended up with option paralysis where I didn't know which one to take out... I used the X-T1 quite a bit when I got it because I preferred the larger size over the X-T30; but then I'd start feeling guilty that the 30 was better in lots of ways and I should be using it... but I couldn't if it was raining.

I ended up selling them both, and buying a used X-T4 and I'm very glad I did. I was in something of an unusual situation though where I'd bought the X-T1 used and didn't lose much on it, and got such an amazing deal when I bought the X-T30 that I actually sold it for a profit.

Sporky

I've got 99 cameras
But a Seitz ain't one

beed84

From a minimalist perspective, either keep the better versions or the ones you use most and get rid of the rest. However, this is coming from someone who doesn't like clutter or stuff not being used, so it may not apply if you're happy keeping cameras for different things.

Devil#20

beed84 said:

From a minimalist perspective, either keep the better versions or the ones you use most and get rid of the rest. However, this is coming from someone who doesn't like clutter or stuff not being used, so it may not apply if you're happy keeping cameras for different things.

That's what I've decided to do. I'm keeping no more than 4 and selling all the Nikon DX (APS-C) lenses where I have that range covered in FX(full frame) which I think is all of them, except my 18-200mm APS-C for the D7100 camera that I intend to keep in the car. 

RaymondLin

Devil#20 said:

beed84 said:

From a minimalist perspective, either keep the better versions or the ones you use most and get rid of the rest. However, this is coming from someone who doesn't like clutter or stuff not being used, so it may not apply if you're happy keeping cameras for different things.

That's what I've decided to do. I'm keeping no more than 4 and selling all the Nikon DX (APS-C) lenses where I have that range covered in FX(full frame) which I think is all of them, except my 18-200mm APS-C for the D7100 camera that I intend to keep in the car. 

What about camera bags? lol

I just got another one today...I now have....

Wotancraft Ryker, Peak Design 10L Sling, Tenba Fulton 14L backpack, Crumbler Geekstar, Crumbler Base Park 20L Backpack, Crumpler Italian Job backpack.  

MrSwanson

As with all gear it's always n+1

idiotwindow

Devil#20 said:

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not.

It rather depends upon who the photographer is. Most wedding photographers nowadays are very average photographers who take the same predictable and banal "reportage" stuff with their F1.4 primes and Sony/Nikon/Canon digitals. I would much rather employ the services of a great photographer using his or her iPhone. Most people I know who are properly serious about photography see it as an art form and are typically uninterested in the gear beyond it doing a job. They are also often more interested in lighting than cameras and lenses.

dazzajl

idiotwindow said:

Devil#20 said:

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not.

It rather depends upon who the photographer is. Most wedding photographers nowadays are very average photographers who take the same predictable and banal "reportage" stuff with their F1.4 primes and Sony/Nikon/Canon digitals. I would much rather employ the services of a great photographer using his or her iPhone. Most people I know who are properly serious about photography see it as an art form and are typically uninterested in the gear beyond it doing a job. They are also often more interested in lighting than cameras and lenses.

Thank you!! As a working snapper, totally this. 

Obviously I have to produce what clients want and more often than not that does mean using a camera that produces a 256mb raw file but the best jobs are the ones that allow some ‘off the leash’ creative time and I’d be happier shooting an event with my phone than a huge bag of kit. 

Sporky

RaymondLin said:

What about camera bags? lol

I just got another one today...I now have....

Wotancraft Ryker, Peak Design 10L Sling, Tenba Fulton 10L backpack, Crumbler Geekstar, Crumbler Base Park 20L Backpack, Crumpler Italian Job backpack.  

Camera bags are ace - so many compartments.

I have three Tenba DNA messengers - the best work bag yet devised. And a Crumpler (something) Roadie backpack. 

Jetsam1

dazzajl said:

idiotwindow said:

Devil#20 said:

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not.

It rather depends upon who the photographer is. Most wedding photographers nowadays are very average photographers who take the same predictable and banal "reportage" stuff with their F1.4 primes and Sony/Nikon/Canon digitals. I would much rather employ the services of a great photographer using his or her iPhone. Most people I know who are properly serious about photography see it as an art form and are typically uninterested in the gear beyond it doing a job. They are also often more interested in lighting than cameras and lenses.

Thank you!! As a working snapper, totally this. 

Obviously I have to produce what clients want and more often than not that does mean using a camera that produces a 256mb raw file but the best jobs are the ones that allow some ‘off the leash’ creative time and I’d be happier shooting an event with my phone than a huge bag of kit. 

Isn't it an old adage the amateurs talk equipment, professionals talk the work. Or something like that (up too late last night baking).

I think I just like cameras, film to DSLR and mirrorless and that is ok too.

Whitecat

dazzajl said:

idiotwindow said:

Devil#20 said:

TimmyO said:

For my needs the answer to the original question. (how many is too many) is 2. And the 1 that leaves me with could be my phone. 

you're wrong if you're serious about photography. Most people aren't and that's where you are. However, if photography is your hobby or your profession then you would disagree. Would you be impressed with a wedding photographer turned up with his iPhone. Probably not.

It rather depends upon who the photographer is. Most wedding photographers nowadays are very average photographers who take the same predictable and banal "reportage" stuff with their F1.4 primes and Sony/Nikon/Canon digitals. I would much rather employ the services of a great photographer using his or her iPhone. Most people I know who are properly serious about photography see it as an art form and are typically uninterested in the gear beyond it doing a job. They are also often more interested in lighting than cameras and lenses.

Thank you!! As a working snapper, totally this. 

Obviously I have to produce what clients want and more often than not that does mean using a camera that produces a 256mb raw file but the best jobs are the ones that allow some ‘off the leash’ creative time and I’d be happier shooting an event with my phone than a huge bag of kit. 

Jetsam1 said:

Isn't it an old adage the amateurs talk equipment, professionals talk the work. Or something like that (up too late last night baking).

I think I just like cameras, film to DSLR and mirrorless and that is ok too.

All of this. As someone who has to film videos professionally sometimes, I want to get the job done with the least amount of gear and the least spend on said gear so my margins are good! Definitely not chasing the latest and greatest - only upgrade cameras or add lenses when I absolutely have to, and then grudgingly, usually! 

ThePrettyDamned

On the gear bit I do find myself fatigued by the popularity of the wide aperture long lens shots that seem to dominate modern portraiture - it's not merely keeping focus on the subject, but often putting parts of the face out of focus when shot at 85mm 1.2, for example. 

It used to be a little different - such lenses were quite soft wide open, giving a quite dreamy look to everything, but the modern ones are furiously sharp and it doesn't work for me. 

And yet every now and then, one will show up that blows me away, which means it's not the depth of field I'm fatigued by - there is some level of artistry I don't get. Perhaps expression, or colour, or tone... Or all of them, most likely. When someone really knows what they are doing, they can take a shot I think I won't like, but I will. 

I'm a big fan of "subjects in their surroundings" though so it makes sense I don't care for the bokeh balls. Photographers like Bruce Percy or James popsys spring to mind. 

My favourite wedding photo was taken by a friend with my rolleiflex. It's technically in focus, but the lens is nigh on 100 years old, and the film was about a decade out of date. It's stopped down to f/8 so you'd think it be sharp, but it's not.