Having two cameras - bane or boon?

[Mark Larson]

I recently sold my Canon A60 and purchased an Optio S. However, I think i'll end up missing my A60's manual control and other features. So i'm thinking of getting an Olympus C-725 for better pictures.

Do you guys who have two cameras think its useful to have two cameras?

I don't want it to be like, "Hmm, i don't want to carry around that big camera today, I'll just take the Optio," all the time. What criteria do you have for taking along the bigger camera, which doesn't fit in a pocket and has to be carried in your hand or slung around your neck?

[Geoff Chandler]

2 cameras is very usefull - appart from all else - it's backup when you are on holiday.
Isn't the C-725 an old model now? - I would suggest the C-765
We all have different requirements. After using my C-740 for a year I was constantly wanting a wider angle - the long zoom, however, is fantastic.
Additionally - there were occasions, I felt, where 3mp was not enough - those complex fine detailed scenes where I wanted to magnify a smallportion of the picture - but it would pixalate - so I went for my A-200 which has the wide angle, and has 8mp capability, and the zoom is pretty good and cover most of my requiremets. Perfect for the job!. So on holiday I will usually take both now. Quick trip up to London, I would take one or the other depending on if I want to slip the camera away in my pocket or not.
Go for it - it is really handy having 2 - The C-765 isn't very big actually - much more compact than the C-725 but with a 10x zoom

[Rhys]

I actually have 3 cameras:

A Nikon 3100 as a shirt-pocket, point and shoot, a Nikon 995 which I use for macro photos (came in a handy concealable leather pouch) and a Canon S1 IS which is bulky and not pocketable nor comes with a handy hide-under-your-jacket holster but which gives me a long zoom range and an excellent video mode. I rarely leave the house without the 3100. When I photograph antique books for websites or flowers, I use my 995. For when I want to go out just to have fun, I take my S1.

[DownByFive]

When I got my D70, I knew that it'd be a mistake to get rid of my Powershot S230. As much as I love my D70, it just won't fit into my pocket, making it less than ideal for taking to parties and out with friends. I also like having something that can record video, since I have no desire to buy a video camera.

[David Metsky]

I have a Oly C-720 and my new Canon SD300. Since buying the SD300 in Dec I've only used the Oly a handful of times, but I appreciate it when I do use it. A lot of my shooting doesn't need my ultrazoom, and it's a pain to carry around when I'm not actively shooting.

As summer hiking season picks up it'll be interesting to see if I start carrying the Oly, the Canon, or both.

-dave-

[Jredtugboat]

I actually have 3 cameras:

A Nikon 3100 as a shirt-pocket, point and shoot, a Nikon 995 which I use for macro photos (came in a handy concealable leather pouch) and a Canon S1 IS which is bulky and not pocketable nor comes with a handy hide-under-your-jacket holster but which gives me a long zoom range and an excellent video mode. I rarely leave the house without the 3100. When I photograph antique books for websites or flowers, I use my 995. For when I want to go out just to have fun, I take my S1.

Hey Rhys,

I had no idea you had the S1! How do you like it? I *thought* I had read somewhere that the images weren't "up to snuff"...how has it performed for you? And would you consider the S2? A friend is considering it for his travel camera...

yours,

Julian

[jasm]

I use three cameras now oly c765 I like lens quality and ultra zoom,oly c 5060 lens again wide angle and easy control and a fuji e550 a very understated camera i like its pocketability great high ISO delivery taken at 12mp and reduced out of camera to 6mp.

james morgan
http://www.pbase.com/jascm/start

[Jredtugboat]

I recently sold my Canon A60 and purchased an Optio S. However, I think i'll end up missing my A60's manual control and other features. So i'm thinking of getting an Olympus C-725 for better pictures.

Do you guys who have two cameras think its useful to have two cameras?

I don't want it to be like, "Hmm, i don't want to carry around that big camera today, I'll just take the Optio," all the time. What criteria do you have for taking along the bigger camera, which doesn't fit in a pocket and has to be carried in your hand or slung around your neck?

I'm glad to see someone else's opinion on this matter, too! I have a baaad feeling that I'm going to wind up carrying around 2 cameras. This weekend I took my 5th grade class to Philadelphia, and wound up with the school's video cam as well as my G2. It wasn't as hard as I thought, though I must admit that I could feel it at the end of the day when I took them both off from around my neck! Here are my thoughts on this:

As I'm in the market for a dSLR, it's going to be the one I carry around most. My G2 will probably not come along for the ride, because while it's not big and bulky like an SLR, it is not a pocketable camera and I'd feel encumbered by having it around my neck as well.

The G2 will continue to excel as a macro camera/point and shoot, but I think that I'll have to get another pocketable camera as well. I'm thinking about something along the lines of an A95. (I like the ergonomics. Y'all are raving about the SD400/500, but I can tell that it won't be comfortable in my hands without a defined, space-grubbing grip.)

The solution for me, I think, will mean getting some sort of hip holster for the small cam and carrying the SLR around my neck.

I don't think there's an easy way out of this! And I haven't even begun to think about what's going to be in the SLR camera bag yet, Heaven help me...

yours,

Julian

[TheObiJuan]

I have the 20D and P150, they both serve their purposes.
I would not get rid of either.

[sherlock]

Hey,

I've got both a D70 and Fuji 3800. It was nice that I didnt get rid of the Fuji because my D70 is in the shop, so I still have a camera, no matter how primitive it is. They both have served me to the best of their abilities.


Andrew S.

[Bluedog]

Since getting my Rebel XT (I should have never found this site :rolleyes: ) the Canon A95 has become the backup. It stores handily in my camera bag for quick access though.

[jeisner]

I have 2 cameras I use from day-to-day my old P30n for film and my *ist DS for digital, they are both Pentax K mount so they share lenses... The P30n is being replaced by a SFX (auto-focus) hopefully it will arrive in the next few days ;) I will probably keep B&W in the P30n though and colour film in the SFX... So three cameras in regular rotation LOL

[Savannah]

2 camera's are a good idea. There are times when it pays to be a little discrete and not lug around an SLR. ;)

[LANNY R]

I read an article recently that compared the difference between film photography and digital photography. In the old days (ha ha, like 2 or 3 years ago!), film photographers used different types of film to give their photographs a different look or personality. Kodachrome is different than Ektachrome, and different than Fuji film. You can switch your look just by switching what is in your camera. Not so with digital. However, in todays digital world, its the digital cameras and their internal processors themselves that afford that different look that film used to do. A Canon is going to give you a different color personality than, say, a Sony camera will. I know I can see the difference, to me the Canon is more life like, whereas Sony cameras seem more saturated, especially the reds--one reviewer described it as a bit more video like. And then there is the new Fuji F10, which while it is harder to use outdoors with a poorly lit LSD screen, is the only P&S camera that can shoot indoors without flash at ISO up to 1600, and still look good. The point that the writer was making, is that just as photographers used to use different films as their creative tools, it is the cameras themselves that today will give variety to your output. So dont feel you have to restrict yourself and your creative vision to just one camera.

[Rhys]

Hey Rhys,

I had no idea you had the S1! How do you like it? I *thought* I had read somewhere that the images weren't "up to snuff"...how has it performed for you? And would you consider the S2? A friend is considering it for his travel camera...

yours,

Julian

It's an excellent camera - as long as the latest firmware upgrade is applied. There;s a bit of purple fringing but that's unavoidable. I went for the S1 over the Panasonic because I already have a stash of 128mb memory cards.

[LANNY R]

Hey, I found that article I mentioned above. VERY interesting, equating digital cameras with film types and why it pays to have multiple cameras.




The Camera Is the Film—Rethinking Digital Photography
ARTICLE DATE:* 04.04.05

By* John C. Dvorak

Since the first digital cameras arrived, and even during the era of video cameras, I have managed to take almost every new model made into the field. I've had enough experience with these cameras to conclude that eventually, serious photographers are going to have to deal with the simple fact that in digital photography, the camera itself is the film. It's a classic (and I hate using the term) paradigm shift.

During the heyday of film cameras, the camera was the vehicle for transmitting the image to the film. You'd buy the best lens and camera combination you could, which tended to boil down to offerings from Leica, Nikon, and maybe Canon or Pentax. Others made good cameras, but the contrast you got with a Leica or Nikon lens was always superior. Other fabled lenses appeared on bigger cameras, and everyone wanted to own a Hasselblad too. But that's all academic in today's market. Things are different.

Yes, it is important to have a good lens, and there are a lot of them nowadays. Nikkors still have that extra something when compared with their imitators. But one variable that's really changed since the old days is the choice of film. You used to be able to buy Kodachrome, knowing you'd get that certain exaggerated look. There were classy black-and-white films such as Ilford. Things got hot when Fuji developed new dyes. Each kind would give you a certain quality that you wouldn't get from any other film. And while I suppose it would be possible to develop plug-ins for Photoshop that mimic the look of certain films, the basic capturing mechanism is now the CCD or CMOS chip. That's the real film. And it's not changeable. Even in postproduction, the best you can do is work with the data you're given. You can't really make new data that is true to the captured image. Anyone who has played with images from small 8-megapixel CCDs knows what some of the problems are in making these images look lively. — Continue reading

So the camera itself has essentially become the film. This is interesting, and I began to notice it when I posted some old photos taken with a now-quaint Kodak DC-50. The pictures had a unique quality. So I pulled my Olympus E-10 out of mothballs. I had taken stunning pictures with this camera over the years. It still takes a nice shot. And it produces photos distinctly different than those made with other 4MP cameras.

Another camera that still takes a great photo is the Olympus 3030. This 3MP camera takes much livelier photos than do the higher-resolution 4040 and 5050 models that came later. It took me years to realize this. Though the detail is not as good, the vibrancy is better. Much of this has to do with pixel size. The bigger the pixel, the better, which has to do with the nature of a CCD.

The point is that each camera has characteristics that are as individual as brands of film had. This leads me to believe that most photographers, whether pros or hobbyists, will eventually have numerous cameras, not the one lone Nikon with the lens collection.

People who know me know that I always have a pocket camera with me, and sometimes I go out to shoot seriously with a big camera. I realized that lately I've been using four cameras, and have considered using the Olympus E-10 again. I've been looking at some other "collectibles" that I might want to shoot with for the fun of it.

I don't know if I'm the average digital-camera user, since I'm often reviewing these cameras and writing about them. But with an all-access pass, why would I want to break out old clunkers to shoot pictures? It's like different film, that's why. When I used film, I loved to play around with different varieties. It was interesting to see the results. High-speed film had a certain grainy quality; low-speed film was unusable in dim lighting. The film, like the cameras today, made demands on you. I am not going to get the same detail on a 3MP camera that I will on a 10MP model. But the picture can still be outstanding. I have blown up old 3MP pictures to wall size with special enhancing software that interpolates the pixels to make more of them. Even in the early days of digital photography, you'd find experts blowing up 2MP shots to 4 by 3 feet with stunning results.

Once we rethink all of this, we may want to keep some of those supposedly obsolete cameras. And it may be a good time to pick up some cheap used cameras on the open market.

The direct link for the above story, if anyone wants, is at http://www.pcmag.com/print_article2/0,2533,a=149089,00.asp