MrFujicaman
Well-known
I have my cameras insured thru State Farm. As I recall, they charge me $12 per $1000 worth of value. This is for a separate policy from my homeowners.
Bill Clark
Veteran
In business I had insurance through the PPofA. What I believed more valuable than insurance for equipment was errors and omissions. Perhaps just lucky, but never had to make a claim with either category.
I question how valuable my old film stuff is worth. If any of it were stolen how could it be replaced as most of it isn't made anymore. And what is it worth to most I believe is next to nada except the few who congregate at places like here.
At any rate, just my thoughts.
I question how valuable my old film stuff is worth. If any of it were stolen how could it be replaced as most of it isn't made anymore. And what is it worth to most I believe is next to nada except the few who congregate at places like here.
At any rate, just my thoughts.
radi(c)al_cam
Well-known
Same here
Additionally, if one is living in an area where theft (or housebreaking, or wilful damage to property, etc.) is very rare, this kind of insurance is rather a waste of money — unless you're a shareholder of the particular insurance company, of course
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Expanding the subject of business/equipment insurance a bit....
Assuming you are in the business of photography, something that hasn't been mentioned here in terms of 'equipment' that you might consider insuring is your computer equipment. I had some pretty major computer issues these last few months, and my insurance company covered all of it (less my deductible). Plus there is also the cost of repairing any camera equipment and if you have to rent replacement equipment while something is out for repair. Finally, there is insurance to cover you in case anything should happen during a shoot (like someone gets hurt or a client's property gets damaged and you're at fault). For example, drones seem to be the big deal now in commercial photography - my insurer won't cover drone photography (when you lose control of your drone and it slams into a parked car or even worse, a person), and I'm sure many photographers who use drones don't even have specific insurance for it.
Bottom line, if you're in the business of photography, you can't have too much insurance.
Assuming you are in the business of photography, something that hasn't been mentioned here in terms of 'equipment' that you might consider insuring is your computer equipment. I had some pretty major computer issues these last few months, and my insurance company covered all of it (less my deductible). Plus there is also the cost of repairing any camera equipment and if you have to rent replacement equipment while something is out for repair. Finally, there is insurance to cover you in case anything should happen during a shoot (like someone gets hurt or a client's property gets damaged and you're at fault). For example, drones seem to be the big deal now in commercial photography - my insurer won't cover drone photography (when you lose control of your drone and it slams into a parked car or even worse, a person), and I'm sure many photographers who use drones don't even have specific insurance for it.
Bottom line, if you're in the business of photography, you can't have too much insurance.
radi(c)al_cam
Well-known
Dear Vince,
I agree with you, an insurance akin to a professional indemnity insurance (I guess in USA it's «professional liability insurance») IS important.
Let's imagine an assignment where you have to photograph kindergarten children, and something stupid happens…
willie_901
Veteran
If it's not appraised... it probably isn't insured.
With proper documentation (invoices) equipment less than 3-5 years old may be insured based on tax returns (depreciation of capital equipment). Older collectables require appraisal to determine value.
As Vince mentioned professional (or personal) indemnity insurance is well worth considering.
With proper documentation (invoices) equipment less than 3-5 years old may be insured based on tax returns (depreciation of capital equipment). Older collectables require appraisal to determine value.
As Vince mentioned professional (or personal) indemnity insurance is well worth considering.
x-ray
Veteran
I'm semi retired but still carry liability insurance. One incident could wipe you out.
As to equipment insurance, when I was actively working every day and had dozens of clients I carried a specific policy on all of my equipment used in the business. My darkroom to my cameras were fully insured. Let me say insuring an entire studio is expensive.
Now that I'm mostly retired and only have a hand full of clients, I have my non commercially used gear on my home owners. If stolen from my home it's covered. It's also covered in my car under my auto insurance if stolen from my car. My business equipment might be covered but not sure. If something happened I could easily cover my work equipment cost out of pocket or just retire fully.
What I do to protect my equipment at home, I have a very heavy and large gun safe anchored in the floor full of cameras and lenses. Matter of fact I have two of them. If I'm out with my gear I never let it out of sight or if I do it's locked in a safe room. In 50 years of work I've never had a claim.
As to equipment insurance, when I was actively working every day and had dozens of clients I carried a specific policy on all of my equipment used in the business. My darkroom to my cameras were fully insured. Let me say insuring an entire studio is expensive.
Now that I'm mostly retired and only have a hand full of clients, I have my non commercially used gear on my home owners. If stolen from my home it's covered. It's also covered in my car under my auto insurance if stolen from my car. My business equipment might be covered but not sure. If something happened I could easily cover my work equipment cost out of pocket or just retire fully
. What I do to protect my equipment at home, I have a very heavy and large gun safe anchored in the floor full of cameras and lenses. Matter of fact I have two of them. If I'm out with my gear I never let it out of sight or if I do it's locked in a safe room. In 50 years of work I've never had a claim.
Tejasican
Well-known
The issue with State Farm is not the payment it is the recovery which is why I would never recommend them. When injured in a wreck they told me unless I had x-rays of the body parts before my wreck to prove that the injury incurred in my accident I would have to sue them for them to pay. This was a few years after they cheated me and I dropped them as a customer. Payments were always reasonable, but they will often force you into court for recovery.
taemo
eat sleep shoot
I voted no, I used to have my camera gears insured but not anymore.
My home insurance provides coverage already for theft/fire in the house so I didn't see any values on putting my camera gear on a separate insurance anymore for the occasional travel that we do.
It also helps that the deductible on any items was $1000, when I had a M9 and M240 and Leica lenses it mades senses but as I don't do photography professionally and my most expensive camera gear is a Fuji X-T2 I decided to cancel my insurance.
My home insurance provides coverage already for theft/fire in the house so I didn't see any values on putting my camera gear on a separate insurance anymore for the occasional travel that we do.
It also helps that the deductible on any items was $1000, when I had a M9 and M240 and Leica lenses it mades senses but as I don't do photography professionally and my most expensive camera gear is a Fuji X-T2 I decided to cancel my insurance.
nikonhswebmaster
reluctant moderator
I do too. Oddly I have to carry auto insurance to purchase a liability umbrella policy, but I don't own a car!
The auto insurance is cheap ($400) and does offer much more protection when renting a car. The theory is, insurance companies don't want people buying liability instead of auto.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
As a perpetual expatriate I've learned that insurance is a complicated business...especially if your damage/loss occurs outside Western Europe or North America and so, I've never bothered insuring my photo equipment.
oftheherd
Veteran
I am inclined to think you got scammed by an adjustment agent. It seems one runs across them more in accident claims that elsewhere. I am not a lawyer, so find out for yourself, but I just can't believe their demand for prior x-rays would get anywhere in court.
FWIW, my experience with State Farm has always been very good. Some on accidents (I live in a very accident prone area), but most specifically, on home owners insurance. We had a house fire. Rather than repairing to their estimate, we were allowed to take the house down to the foundation and rebuild (and coincidently save them money). The only down side was property replacement. I don't know how they sell policies now, but then we were allowed to state a value and the premium was set based on our self evaluation of worth. We didn't even come close. One has to figure replacement value as well as original cost. If not, you will be sorry.
Tom R
Established
When I earned money making photographs for clients, etc., I always maintained Commercial Insurance--expensive, but worthwhile. For the last decade or so I've been doing other things to make a living and insured all of my equipment through a Homeowner's Policy ... also a wise investment (and cheaper than the Commercial Policy).
I have only about $11,000 in actual camera equipment. The Commercial Insurance, however, also provided protection from lawsuits, injuries, etc.
As I will retire from my "day job" in a few months, I may revisit how I wish to work and I will probably have to re-up the Commercial Policy, which is not as easy as it sounds, but, again, worth the aggravation.
I have only about $11,000 in actual camera equipment. The Commercial Insurance, however, also provided protection from lawsuits, injuries, etc.
As I will retire from my "day job" in a few months, I may revisit how I wish to work and I will probably have to re-up the Commercial Policy, which is not as easy as it sounds, but, again, worth the aggravation.