Second Body

Well I think if I had to 'mix' two cameras I'd take not only different films but also different formats, something like a rangefinder w/35 and an Isolette/Moskva or maybe the Minolta SLR and my Rolleicord.

IMO it's a very different thing if you're 'on assignment' even if you're not a pro, as then you may prefer to have a wide range of options in your hand.

Since some time ago I don't even consider the option of carrying two cameras with me, simply too much weight and space in my bag! 🙂

And I'm sure I'd end using mostly one or the other, and taking decent pictures is a pretty difficult task per se, so why should I add even more decisions ? 😉
 
I shot it at 400 - the photos in the gallery here that were taken at the Gay Pride Parade in San Francisco (5 of them I think) were all taken with the Fuji Neopan 400.

Example:
 
I recently covered a classic concert in a church. Lots of limitations to cope with: no noise allowed during performance of music (my only 'silent' camera is the Canonet QL19 and that has severe light leaks that are waiting for repair), so only shooting during applaud or entering or exiting of orchestra. Flash is considered 'bad' at any situation. And the church light conditions were quite poor.

Shooting 'targets' range from individual performers to wide shots of the choir+orchestra or public.

To have some coverage at least, a lot of shooting had to be done in a short time period, using fast lenses. This excludes using a zoom-lens, so the only alternative left was to take two bodies, one with a fast prime wide angle and the other with a fast prime tele.

But that's more or less the only situation I would consider taking two bodies with me. And really the only difference was the lens, because they were loaded with identical film.

Groeten,

Vic
 
I use two M bodies, for two main reasons:

There have been situations where I've cursed only having one body along - for example shooting some promos around town for a band. I was working in two focal lengths at various locations, 35 and 75. I spent more time than I would have thought possible swapping lenses.

That experience was the clincher that sent me shopping for the M6.

The other reason is that my main shooter is an M2. It is the perfect tool for me in almost every situation. Except for those when on-board metering through the lens is just really, really useful (for me, often shooting gigs). Again, enter M6.

That is my rational. The other factor for the M6 is the 75 framelines, but that's not a reason for a second body, just an influence in the choice.
 
Rich,

Search the New York Times online database for the August 18, 2002 article/interview with Josef Koudelka of Magnum (by Vicki Goldberg).

You will find your answer to the "one body" question ;-)
 
Rich Silfver said:
"one for colour and one for b&w" always crack me up especially when people add that 'and i use b&w in the black body and colour in the chrome'.
Let's get real here for a second - that is simply trying to justify your need of a new toy! 🙂
Have I ever felt that I wish I had a colour film loaded when coming across a particularly nice colourful scene? Sure - but so what. There are also times I don't carry a camera. Such is life..

For the most part I do agree with you. However, there have been times when I have had two bodies with me. One with a wide and color film and a second with a 50 and B&W. Both hanging around my neck. Black and White on the short strap and Color on the long. The last time was when I was shooting at the Cherry Blossom festival in DC. It was a PITA but It was worth it.

If I am shooting with my SLR, I will usually shoot color only and take a zoom lens and no other bodies.

With my new passion for LF I wll have one of my rangefinders with me to take shots of people staring at me fiddling with the camera and tripod. I beleive that qualifies as two bodies. 🙂
 
I'm going on vaction this summer with my family and I've decided to take 3 cameras. 35mm colour slides (to enjoy later as slide shows) , 35mm B+W for me, and MF B+W for those really special photo opps.

When I go out for a walk, usually it is with only 1 camera at a time.

I'll bet you will start carrying your Contax with you as well as the Leica.
 
Last edited:
I'm by no means a professional, but I do use two (or three) bodies for assignments - and I suppose you're only talking about shooting purely for fun, so that doesn't really count I guess. If I'm just walking around taking pictures for no good reason I won't carry more than one body and one lens (usually Bessa R with 35 skopar).

For assignments, multiple bodies are simply necessary. Not only because I usually don't have time to change lenses, but also because you gotta wait for a quiet moment to change film - never want to be caught changing film when 'it' is happening.
 
simonankor said:
I would dearly love a second Barnack (or clone) to go with my FED 1... simple reason is that way it's twice as long before I need to find a quiet cafe to sit in while I change film 😉

Thats the worst reason to buy a second body I've ever heard 😉

I even buy film with only 12 frames for that reason 😀 (just joking)

Joris
 
Rich, I appreciate what you 're saying. With respect, I do not agree. There's ample reason to have a second camera body with you. First you can load the cameras with b&w films of different speed. Which means you can use a slow film for outdoor shots and a medium/fast one for indoors or available light. Consider this: A medium fast film on sunny conditions practicaly limits you to f16, 1/500 or 1/1000. But a slower film gives room for moderate OOF effects (and perhaps greater tonal range). At the same time you cannot really take the slow film for indoor shooting. Loading one camera with B&W and the other with colour film is not so unreasonable either IMO. A second body as a back-up will also alleviate the perenial fear that you will miss that one crucial photo for lack of functioning equipment.

Does that mean that if you go out with only one camera body you will miss a shot that would have been captured by the availability of a second camera body? To be frank, I think not. But some options open to you by the sheer availability of a second camera body are definitely lost.

All these are sufficient (but admittedly not necessary) reasons for carrying around a second camera body. (Which is to say: some of us have good reasons that are not reasons for the rest).

For what it's worth, I usually go out with two cameras. One loaded with Delta 100; the other with XP2 400 or TriX400.
 
telenous said:
Rich, I appreciate what you 're saying. With respect, I do not agree. There's ample reason to have a second camera body with you. First you can load the cameras with b&w films of different speed. Which means you can use a slow film for outdoor shots and a medium/fast one for indoors or available light. Consider this: A medium fast film on sunny conditions practicaly limits you to f16, 1/500 or 1/1000. But a slower film gives room for moderate OOF effects (and perhaps greater tonal range). ...


Good reasons. I was caught by this myself recently, and cursing the fact I had left the ND filter at home.
 
I have a few "second" bodies for different gear. I don't, however, have it for the "usual" reasons you've stated above. I am guilty of the "one for color, the other for B&W" thought having crossed my mind, but that is really downright silly.

Hauling around two of the same really kills the experience for me. I can say that after having tried it after a long time wishing having a "second body" to shoot with.

Now I think of the "second body" as the backup; the "what if one of them breaks?" Plan B. Even then, like you said, that base is covered when one has so many other cameras laying around. I guess it depends on whether you're obsessed with a particular lens or camera. Some people just do it for the body count, just for the count's sake.

Different lenses, I still do that; I do carry a few of the same focal length at times, sometimes lots.

I think the only cameras that still accomplish this "one for color, one for B&W" idea well are the removable back cameras. My Hasselblad 500 and Bronica S2. And a certain Contarex, but I'm not going down that road.

All of that said, there are still days that I take my Contax and Leica together. One with B&W loaded, the other with color... heh
 
Sorry, I'm sticking to the different bodies for different film story! (B+W / colour or fast/slow) Even when I'm only shooting B+W, it's nice to reach into your bag and pull out the sencond body with the CV25mm lens and viewfinder already attached.
 
I'm a multiple camera kind of guy...

I'm a multiple camera kind of guy...

I do a lot of railroad photo charters, so I'll take 3 cameras with me, but I ususally only carry two at a time. My basic two cameras tend to be an SLR loaded with slide film, and a digital. The CL stays in the bag, but does get used when the SLR doesn't.

Although, I just got back from a trip where I only used my digital.
 
Rich.. I'm purely into this as a hobby. I like the gear, I like taking the photos, I like printing them and sending them to friends. I am acquiring more gear now, immediate family thinks I'm crazy, but I'm doing it while I can.

I've tried walking about with two RF's.. with different films loaded or different lenses onboard.. never worked for me. I usually end up just taking one camera with me.. like I'm taking it out for a walk 😀 95% of the time I use only one camera, because that's where my mind is set. The other 5% of the time the photos end up HORRIBLE, they're usually rushed as I can't wait to get back to the "main" camera for the day.

If I'm out for a photography club field trip, I'll usually take an RF and the dSLR with me, as I also enjoy taking macros of flower gonads and butterfly eggs. I find it easier to switch between these two. *shrug*

Jano
 
Back
Top Bottom