More cameras = more photos?or not

[Pherdinand]

Did you notice an increase in the number of photos you take (regardless of result) when you started to gather more and more cameras/lenses? Or, is it a steady number? or, did the total number decrease, maybe?

Don't include "test" rolls 🙂

I ask it, because I had the feeling that the number of exposed frames decreases since I use four cameras instead of one. So i checked on the processing envelopes - and, in fact, it's the same like it was before.

 

[RML]

Well, as I'm only able to shoot 1 camera at the same time, I reckon that owning more cameras didn't increase the number of rolls shot. 🙂

 

[Todd.Hanz]

My number of rolls has increased as a result of buying my M6, maybe I feel I have to justify the cost by shooting more 😀 .

Todd

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Actually I found that having Nikki increased the number of rolls that I shot each week. It also increased my use of the Nikon RF's as they make great Kid Snapshot cameras. A fast 50, a good fast portrait lens, and a 135 for the playground. Then to even things out I needed the M3 and Canon 7 so that I would not wear out the Nikon's taking kid shots. I like RF's because it takes the picture when you "click" off the shot and you do not get the mirror black-out of an SLR or the eternal latency of Digital and P&S cameras. I took a shot with the N70 last week and the damn thing took almost one second to finally fire the shot after hitting the button. Red-eye reduction was off, flash ready light was charged, and it just kept sitting there. Needless to say the moment was lost.

Every new and expecting parent should line up a good classic RF to get the best kid shots possible. Public Service Announcement.

 

[Pherdinand]

🙂 yes, they should be instructed how to use a rf before the kid is born, just like veerything else has to be known well before.

 

[taffer]

Well in my case more cameras = ... less money 😀

But oth it was after realizing I had too many cameras that I discovered the paw and decided to follow it, and that lead me to more pictures than ever 🙂

Too bad you people don't like SLRs, look what I've just found 😉

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=44751&item=3817113207

 

[rover]

I think for me, more shooting and more cameras are both symptoms of my increasing interest in photography in general, and not directly related to one another. And like Brian, having a 4 year old son also is a big factor in my film consumption.

 

[jfbell20]

I would say more for two reasons. More cameras means that you can have the right speed film for the conditions. Secondly if you have a compact that you carry everyhere you take more pictures.

 

[jfbell20]

I would say more for two reasons. More cameras means that you can have the right speed film for the conditions. Secondly if you have a compact that you carry everyhere you take more pictures.

 

[JohnM]

It might be against the grain, but the more cameras I had, the fewer photos I took. I spent more time cleaning, fixing, finding accessories, etc., than I did using the cameras.

I've gotten rid of a number of cameras and will probably continue to until I've gotten rid of the manual SLRs. I think I've found a comfort zone - digital rebel with a couple of EOS and M42 lenses, a digital P&S that is more fun than I thought it could be and the Bessa R2 which has landed the first two cameras on the shelf.

Much simpler - I either grab the film or byte burner and go. I think less about the cameras and more about how to squeeze in a hike or a short ride to go shooting. I would say I've shot 50% more in the last month as a result.

 

[Kris]

More camera does mean more photos to me. Having two systems, RF and SLR, allow me to have broader range of photo opportunity.

For example, if I had only RF camera, I wouldn't be able to take photos where light condition changes rapidly or where fast tele lens is a requirement. If I had only SLR, then I would look like a dopey PJ rather than a dopey tourist on the street and it would be rather hard to blend with the crowd without drawing much attention.

 

[wierdcollector]

For myself, more cameras equals less pictures. Unless you count test rolls. I find I spend more time on E**y, at yard sales, pawn shops and thrift stores now than I did when I had a dozen or so, and less on my photography. Besides, after taking roll after roll of test shots, I rapidly run out of new or interesting things to shoot. Partially because I'm not a real fan of people photos and have no kids so there are two major subjects right there.

 

[Stanton]

More camera definitely means more shots for me, but, as someone said, that may only be because I have renewed my interest in photography which was rather dormant for some years. Now the problem is decidiing what to shoot, when and what to take on a trip. Nice problem to have.

 

[Kin Lau]

Given that I usually shoot BW with my film cameras, I do shoot more with more cameras.

I was at a wedding on the weekend, and shot with 3 different cameras, 1 slr w/ Fuji Superia 400, 1 slr w/ Fuji Neopan 1600 and a Canonet GIII QL17 w/ HP5. I loaned my Dreb out to my sister for candid shots.

I try to start a roll in several different cameras, and pickup a different camera to go out with, to try to do a little more shooting.

 

[Honu-Hugger]

Intersting topic because much to my surprise once I acquired every camera I ever thought I wanted I felt completely overwhelmed -- stifled to the point of almost taking no pictures. I realized the absurdity of the situation and did some serious "house cleaning." I took pictures everywhere and all the time when I only had one camera and four lenses (and only two of those lenses saw regular use). I longed for those days and determined the only way to get back there was to ease my load. Getting rid of the excess was the most liberating feeling I've had in a long time -- and I'm taking more pictures again!

Doug